Background: The negative effect of mental fatigue (MF) on physical performance has recently been questioned. One reason behind this could lie in the interindividual differences in MF-susceptibility and the individual features influencing them. However, the range of individual differences in mental fatigue-susceptibility is not known, and there is no clear consensus on which individual features could be responsible for these differences. Objective: To give an overview of interindividual differences in the effects of MF on whole-body endurance performance, and individual features influencing this effect. Methods: The review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022293242). PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus and PsycINFO were searched until the 16th of June 2022 for studies detailing the effect of MF on dynamic maximal whole-body endurance performance. Studies needed to include healthy participants, describe at least one individual feature in participant characteristics, and apply at least one manipulation check. The Cochrane crossover risk of bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. The meta-analysis and regression were conducted in R. Results: Twenty-eight studies were included, with 23 added to the meta-analysis. Overall risk of bias of the included studies was high, with only three presenting an unclear or low rating. The meta-analysis shows the effect of MF on endurance performance was on average slightly negative (g = − 0.32, [95% CI − 0.46; − 0.18], p < 0.001). The multiple meta-regression showed no significant influences of the included features (i.e. age, sex, body mass index and physical fitness level) on MF-susceptibility. Conclusions: The present review confirmed the negative impact of MF on endurance performance. However, no individual features influencing MF-susceptibility were identified. This can partially be explained by the multiple methodological limitations such as underreporting of participant characteristics, lack of standardization across studies, and the restricted inclusion of potentially relevant variables. Future research should include a rigorous description of multiple different individual features (e.g., performance level, diet, etc.) to further elucidate MF mechanisms.

Mental fatigue (MF) is a psychobiological state negatively impacting both cognitive and physical performance. Although recent research implies that some table tennis (TT) performance outcomes are impaired by MF, open skill sports such as TT require a more detailed overview of MF-related performance decrements. Moreover, research into MF and sport-specific psychomotor performance lacks the inclusion of brain-related measurements to identify MF mechanisms. Eleven experienced TT players participated in this randomized counterbalanced crossover trial. Participants were either required to perform an individualized Stroop task (MF condition) or watch a documentary (control condition). The primary outcomes were reaction time on a sport-specific visuomotor task and EEG activity throughout the trial. The subjective feeling of MF was significantly different between both conditions and confirmed that the MF condition induced the mentally fatigue state of participants (p < 0.001), though no behavioral indicators (i.e., decrease in performance on Stroop and flanker task) of MF. MF worsened reaction time on the visuomotor task, while other secondary measurements remained largely ambiguous. Spectral power (i.e., decreases in upper α band and θ band) was influenced by MF, while ERPs measured during the visuomotor task remained unaltered. The present study confirms that MF negatively impacts table tennis performance, specifically inhibitory stimuli during the visuomotor task. These findings also further augment our understanding of the effects of MF on human performance.

Mental fatigue (MF) is a complex phenomenon with significant implications for human performance, for which there are numerous studies investigating the effects of MF. Nevertheless, there is considerable variability in the approaches used to induce and quantify MF, making it hard to compare findings across studies and draw well-supported conclusions. This review addresses the methodological variability in the induction and quantification methods of MF in movement science in the following ways: on the one hand, by providing an overview of task design strategies to induce MF, emphasizing the importance of tailoring task duration, difficulty, and nature to individual participants and specific research contexts; on the other hand, by providing an overview of current methods used to quantify MF, including behavioural, subjective, and physiological measures, and highlighting the strengths and limitations of each. Finally, this review proposes a best-practice framework for MF research, incorporating multi-method approaches for the induction and quantification of MF and introducing the Settings, Protocol establishments, Confounders, Individuals, Framework, and Yield (SPeCIFY) reporting guidelines that aim at improving consistency and transparency in future MF studies.