Verbal-Motor Attention-Focusing Instructions Influence Kinematics and Performance on a Golf-Putting Task

The authors examined how varying the content of verbal-motor instructions and requesting an internal versus external focus influenced the kinematics and outcome of a golf putting task. On Day 1, 30 novices performed 120 trials with the instruction to focus attention either on performing a pendulum-like movement (internal) or on the desired ball path (external). After 20 retention trials on Day 2, they performed 20 transfer trials with the opposite instruction. Group differences for retention and a group by block interaction showed that external instruction enhanced movement outcome. Kinematic data indicated that specific instruction content influenced outcomes by eliciting changes in movement execution. Switching from the external to the internal focus instruction resulted in a more pendulum-like movement.     

Effects of attentional-focus instructions on movement kinematics

BackgroundRecent research has shown that internal (body-related) attention-focus instructions disrupt motor learning and performance, whereas paying attention to the environmental effects of movements (external focus) leads to better performance than an internal focus [see, for reviews, Wulf, G. (2007). Attentional focus and motor learning: a review of 10 years of research. E-Journal Bewegung und Training, 1, 4–14.; Wulf, G., &; Prinz, W. (2001). Directing attention to movement effects enhances learning: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin &; Review, 8, 648–660.]. However, Beilock's studies [Beilock, S. L., Bertenthal, B. I., McCoy, A. M., &; Carr, T. H. (2004). Haste does not always make waste: expertise, direction of attention, and speed versus accuracy in performing sensorimotor skills. Psychonomic Bulletin &; Review, 11, 373–379.] suggest that an internal focus is detrimental in experts but not in novices. Because detrimental effects of consciously attending to movements have generally been measured by performance scores such as accuracy scores or reaction times, it remains unclear how internal and external attentional-focus instructions influence movement kinematics when learning a new skill. To fill this gap, the present study investigated attentional-focus effects on a biomechanical level.MethodsA video of an expert juggler demonstrating a two-ball juggling task was presented to juggling novices. Experimental groups were given either body-related (internal group) or ball-related (external group) verbal instructions or no attention-guiding instructions (control group). In the retention phase without attention-guiding instructions, the body-movement and ball-flight aspects of performance focused on in the verbal instruction were subjected to biomechanical analyses.Results and ConclusionsJuggling performance improved equally in all three groups. However, internally vs. externally instructed acquisition phases had differential effects on the kinematics of the upper body as well as ball trajectories when performing the juggling task. Remarkably, ball trajectories in the control group who received no specific attentional cueing were similar to those in the externally instructed group. This suggests that task-relevant information is picked up independently of instructions, and that external instructions provide redundant information. Internal instructions for object-related tasks, however, may confront novice learners with the need to process additional information. As a result, task difficulty might be unnecessarily enhanced in an observational learning setting.     

Attentional focus on suprapostural tasks affects balance learning

We examined whether the attentional focus induced by a suprapostural task has an influence on the learning of a dynamic balance task. Participants balanced on a stabilometer and were required to hold a tube horizontal with both hands. In Experiment 1, the tube contained a table tennis ball, whereas it was empty in Experiment 2. Participants were instructed to focus on either their hands (internal focus) or the tube (external focus). We measured balance performance as a function of attentional focus on the suprapostural task. Participants practised for 2 days, and on Day 3 they performed a retention test (with tube) and a transfer test (without tube). In both experiments, the external focus groups demonstrated more effective retention and transfer than the internal focus groups (and than the control group in transfer in Experiment 2). In addition, in Experiment 1 the external group was superior in keeping the tube horizontal. This suggests that the performer's attentional focus regarding the suprapostural task affects performance and learning not only of the suprapostural task itself, but also of the postural task.     

Does focus of attention alter craniocervical flexion test motor learning? A randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of three different foci of attention (internal, external and mixed) on motor learning using craniocervical flexion test in inexperienced participants.MethodsNinety healthy young adults, with no experience in the task, practiced the craniocervical flexion test under three different focus of attention: a) Mixed Focus (internal plus external), b) Internal Focus, and c) External Focus. We assessed immediate, post-training, and retention (one week after the last training session) aspects of motor learning by quantifying (i) the activity of the superficial cervical flexors muscles, (ii) craniocervical range of motion, and (iii) the performance on the craniocervical flexion test.ResultsNone of the groups showed any significant immediate, post-training, or retention effects on superficial neck flexors activity and craniocervical range of motion progression. At immediate assessment, mixed focus had greater craniocervical flexion performance than external (MD 0.9, 95%CI 0.2 to 1.5), and internal foci (MD 1.4, 95%CI 0.8 to 2.1). At post-training, mixed focus led to better craniocervical performance compared to external (MD 1.6, 95%CI 0.8 to 2.4) and internal foci (MD 2.7, 95%CI 1.9 to 3.5). External focus had better scores on the craniocervical flexion test performance than internal focus (MD 1.1, 95%CI 0.3 to 1.9). Results remained similar at retention, with mixed focus being superior to internal (MD 2.3, 95%CI 1.7 to 3) and external foci (MD 1.5, 95%CI 0.9 to 2.1) on craniocervical flexion test performance. Similarly, the performance on the craniocervical flexion test performance remained similar at retention between external and internal foci (MD 0.9, 95%CI 0.2 to 1.5).ConclusionIn inexperienced asymptomatic participants, different foci of attention were not able to change cervical muscle activity and craniocervical range of motion during the craniocervical flexion test. Mixed focus was better than external and internal focus on the craniocervical flexion test. These findings were retained after one week.     

Harnessing the wandering mind: The role of perceptual load

Perceptual load is a key determinant of distraction by task-irrelevant stimuli (e.g., Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75-82). Here we establish the role of perceptual load in determining an internal form of distraction by task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs or “mind-wandering”).Four experiments demonstrated reduced frequency of TUTs with high compared to low perceptual load in a visual-search task. Alternative accounts in terms of increased demands on responses, verbal working memory or motivation were ruled out and clear effects of load were found for unintentional TUTs. Individual differences in load effects on internal (TUTs) and external (response-competition) distractors were correlated. These results suggest that exhausting attentional capacity in task-relevant processing under high perceptual load can reduce processing of task-irrelevant information from external and internal sources alike.     

External focus of attention and autonomy support have additive benefits for motor performance in children

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the combined effects of external focus instructions and autonomy support on motor performance of children. In addition, we sought to provide evidence for an increased focus on the task goal under the external focus condition by using an inattentional blindness manipulation.DesignWithin-participant design.MethodThirty-six children (mean age = 8.5 ± 1.3 years) were asked to perform a bowling task with their dominant hand. Each participant performed 8 trials under external focus (path of the ball), internal focus (hand), or control conditions. In each attentional focus condition, they performed half of the trials under a choice (autonomy support) condition, in which they were able to choose among 4 bowling balls, and a no-choice condition (white ball).ResultsThe external focus instruction resulted in greater bowling accuracy (i.e., more pins knocked down) than internal focus and no instructions (control). Furthermore, choice resulted in more effective performance than no choice. Thus, both factors had additive benefits for performance. There was some evidence for an increased task focus in the external condition.ConclusionsThe present results show that, within the same individuals, instructions to adopt an external focus and the provision of a small choice contributed independently to enhance motor performance in children.     

The Link Between Cerebellar Dominance and Skilled Hand Performance in 8–10-Year-Old Right-Handed Children

A focus of attention on the step-by-step control of a skill has been shown to be detrimental to experts' performance but to have no significant effect on novices' performance (e.g., S. L. Beilock, T. H. Carr, C. MacMahon, &; J. L. Starkes, 2002), contrary to the results of manipulations of the direction of attentional focus (e.g., G. Wulf, M. Hös, &; W. Prinz, 1998). In previous studies, researchers have not separated the focus of attention from the nature of the instruction provided or the skill level of the participants. In the present experiment, 10 skilled and 10 less skilled soccer players dribbled a ball after receiving instructions directing attention to an internal, skill-relevant feature (foot); an internal, skill-irrelevant feature (arm); or a skill-irrelevant task (word-monitoring). Performance was evaluated in relation to a no-attentional-focus control condition. For skilled performers, an internal focus on the arms and feet interfered with performance. For less skilled performers, an internal, yet skill-relevant, focus of attention (foot) did not degrade performance, whereas attention to the arms and word monitoring had a detrimental effect. No significant differences were observed across the three attentional manipulations when the skilled performers used the nondominant foot. The results generally supported the deautomization of skills hypothesis.     

Online attentional-focus manipulations in a soccer-dribbling task: implications for the proceduralization of motor skills

A focus of attention on the step-by-step control of a skill has been shown to be detrimental to experts' performance but to have no significant effect on novices' performance (e.g., S. L. Beilock, T. H. Carr, C. MacMahon, & J. L. Starkes, 2002), contrary to the results of manipulations of the direction of attentional focus (e.g., G. Wulf, M. H?ss, & W. Prinz, 1998). In previous studies, researchers have not separated the focus of attention from the nature of the instruction provided or the skill level of the participants. In the present experiment, 10 skilled and 10 less skilled soccer players dribbled a ball after receiving instructions directing attention to an internal, skill-relevant feature (foot); an internal, skill-irrelevant feature (arm); or a skill-irrelevant task (word-monitoring). Performance was evaluated in relation to a no-attentional-focus control condition. For skilled performers, an internal focus on the arms and feet interfered with performance. For less skilled performers, an internal, yet skill-relevant, focus of attention (foot) did not degrade performance, whereas attention to the arms and word monitoring had a detrimental effect. No significant differences were observed across the three attentional manipulations when the skilled performers used the nondominant foot. The results generally supported the deautomization of skills hypothesis.     

Processing deceptive information in sports: Individual differences for responding to head fakes depends on the attentional capability of the observer

In team sports, players sometimes try to deceive their opponents by providing misleading information in order to gain a temporal advantage. Head-fakes are often applied when a player gazes in one direction, while passing/shooting the ball in another direction. The opponent is challenged to focus attention on the relevant information (i.e., pass direction), while ignoring the conflicting information (i.e., gaze direction). The present study aimed to identify the link between attentional capabilities and the effectiveness of head fakes. Twenty-seven novices performed in a basketball-specific head-fake task and in the attention-window task. A correlation between performances in both tasks revealed that participants with higher attentional capabilities were better able to focus their attention on the relevant feature (pass direction), when judging basketball situations, than participants with lower attentional capabilities. The results emphasize the relevance of high attentional capabilities in team sports and indicate that focusing one’s attention to the pass direction poses a possibility of reducing the effects of head fakes.     

Effects of an external focus of attention and target occlusion on performance in virtual reality

The use of virtual reality as a training mechanism continues to gain popularity as equipment becomes more readily available. It is important to not only understand the relationship between virtual reality training and motor learning, but to understand the extent to which practice manipulations enhance performance in virtual reality. One common practice manipulation is adopting an external focus of attention, which has been shown to facilitate motor learning in a variety tasks. The purposes of the present study were to investigate the effectiveness of an external focus of attention and the effects of target occlusion times in virtual reality. Fifty-six participants performed a single-leg long jump during baseline, training, and retention and were randomly assigned to either an external or control group. During baseline and retention, all participants performed the task in both a virtual reality (VR) and real world (RW) environments. Training was all done in VR where participants were provided an external focus cue or no cue. Results revealed that individuals jumped significantly further in RW than VR in both baseline and retention (p < .001). During training, the external group jumped significantly further than control (p < .05). These results suggest that the adoption of an external focus improves performance during training. However, we did not see a benefit of an external focus in retention. These findings should be taken into consideration when using virtual reality as a training tool when performance must be transferred to a real world environment.     

Attentional focus on supra-postural tasks affects postural control

We examined whether the attentional focus adopted on a supra-postural task has an influence on postural control. Similar to Riley, Stoffregen, Grocki, and Turvey (Human Movement Science 18 (1999) 795), participants were instructed to stand still while lightly touching a loosely hanging sheet with their fingertips. However, instructions varied slightly under two conditions: Participants were either asked to minimize movements of the finger (internal focus) or to minimize movements of the sheet (external focus). In contrast to Riley et al.'s findings, both touch conditions resulted in increased postural sway, compared to a baseline condition (no touch). However, in line with previous findings (e.g., Wulf, McNevin, & Shea, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 54A (2001) 1143), frequency of responding (fast Fourier transformation) was greater under the external focus condition, compared to both internal focus and baseline conditions. The findings indicate improved static balance responses under external focus conditions and compromised static balance response under internal focus conditions.     

Limitations in advance task preparation: Switching the relevant stimulus dimension in speeded same—different comparisons

When participants switch between relevant stimulus dimensions in speeded classification tasks, taskswitching cost is reduced by advance preparation. Previous studies in which speeded classification tasks were used have suggested that this effect results from attending to the relevant stimulus dimension. Because selective attention to the relevant stimulus dimension in same—different judgments is relatively poor (e.g., Santee &; Egeth, 1980), it was predicted that advance task preparation for a shift in the relevant stimulus dimension would be compromised. This prediction was borne out in two experiments comparing dimension shifts (shape vs.fill) with task rule shifts (same? vs.different?) and shifts in the mapping of right—left keys toyes and_to responses (yes—no vs.no—yes). The results indicate that advance attentional selection of the relevant dimension is an optional preparatory strategy in task switching, employed only in conditions enabling flexible refocusing of attention.     

External focus and autonomy support: Two important factors in motor learning have additive benefits

We examined whether the combination of two factors that have consistently been found to enhance motor learning – an external focus (EF) of attention and autonomy support (AS) – would produce additive benefits. Participants practiced throwing with their non-dominant arm. In a 2 × 2 design, they were or were not asked to focus externally (i.e., on the target), and were or were not given a choice (autonomy support). The latter involved choosing 2 5-trials blocks during practice on which they used their dominant arm. All four groups – EF/AS, EF, AS, and C (control) – completed a practice phase consisting of 60 trials. The distance to the target (bull’s eye) was 7.5 m. One day later, participants performed retention (same target distance) and transfer tests (8.5 m). Both external focus instructions and autonomy support enhanced retention and transfer performance. Importantly, the combination of these factors resulted in additive learning advantages. The EF/AS group showed the greatest throwing accuracy, and the EF and AS groups outperformed the C group. In addition, self-efficacy measured after practice and before retention and transfer was increased by both factors. Thus, promoting an external focus of attention and supporting learners’ need for autonomy seem to independently influence learning.     

Does subliminal priming of free response choices depend on task set or automatic response activation?

In a task requiring speeded bidirectional responses to arrow symbols (?,?), "free choice" responses to interspersed bidirectional stimuli (<>) are influenced by masked directional primes (e.g., Schlaghecken & Eimer, 2004). By varying stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility, we tested whether this priming effect is mediated by the conscious instructional set, or instead by pre-existing directional associations to the symbols. In two experiments, one group of participants was instructed to respond with the hand consistent with the implied direction of the arrow symbols, while another group was instructed to make the spatially opposite responses. Both groups showed priming of "free choice" responses. However, such priming was always biased according to the instructional set rather than pre-existing associations. Subliminal priming of "free choice" responses therefore depends on conscious task goals.     

Effects of attentional focus on movement coordination complexity

Attentional focus affects performance and learning of motor tasks. An external attentional focus (on the effects of movement) can lead to more efficient and effective movements compared to an internal focus (on body movement itself). According to the “constrained action hypothesis”, an external focus facilitates fast and reflexive movement control while an internal focus leads to disruption of automatic coordination processes. Such disruption should be apparent in the complexity of movement. In this study, multiscale entropy measures were used to investigate if the external focus is related to superior coordination complexity compared to internal focus. Twenty participants were divided in two groups that balanced over an unstable platform in fourteen trials over two days, either with internal or external focus of attention instructions, followed by seven retention trials on the third day. Multiscale entropy measures were used to quantify complexity of motions of the platform, the participant, and the composite of participant and platform motions. Results were contrary to expectations. For the external focus group, despite better overall performance, multiscale entropy values of participant and composite motions were lower in some scales compared to the internal focus group, especially in the first and last days. This may be consistent with previous findings that predictability increases during learning of a balance task. Results also indicate the need to identify the correct physiological interpretation of single or multiscale entropy measures. Further investigation is needed to establish if entropy differences are causally related to performance and learning advantages of the external focus.     

Differences in children’s thinking and learning during attentional focus instruction

Considerable evidence supports the motor learning advantage associated with an external focus of attention; however, very few studies have investigated attentional focus effects with children despite individual functional constraints that have the potential to impact use of instructional content. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the effect of attentional focus instruction on motor learning in children. Participants (n = 42) aged 9–11 years were randomly assigned to one of three gender-stratified groups: (1) control, (2) internal focus, or (3) external focus. Following initial instructions and task demonstration, participants performed 100 modified free throws over two days while receiving additional cues respective to their attentional focus condition and returned approximately 48 h later to perform 20 additional free throws. Results revealed no significant learning differences between groups. However, responses to retrospective verbal reports suggest that the use of external focus content during practice may have contributed to some participants’ superior performance in retention. Future research should continue to examine attentional focus effects across a variety of ages and incorporate retrospective verbal reports in order to examine children’s thoughts during attentional focus instruction.     

Anticipatory postural adjustments during a Fitts’ task: Comparing young versus older adults and the effects of different foci of attention

Anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) are an integral part of standing balance. Previous research with balance control has shown that adopting an external focus of attention, compared to an internal focus of attention, yields better performance during motor skills. Despite the importance of APAs, especially among older adults, and the potential benefits of adopting an external focus of attention, studies investigating methods for improving APAs are limited. The aim of this study was to compare behavioral, kinematic and APAs measures while adopting different foci of attention among young and older adults when performing a lower extremity Fitts’ task. Ten young adults (mean age 24 years ± 4.37) and ten older adults (mean age 75 years ± 5.85) performed a lower-extremity reaching task (Fitts’ task) while adopting an external focus (focus on target) and an internal focus (focus on limb) in a within-subject design. A motion capture system was used to record participants’ movement data. Custom software derived movement time (MT), peak velocity (PV), time to peak velocity (ttPV) and variability at target (SD_T). Electromyography (EMG) was used to determine APAs onset and magnitude. The findings showed that an external focus of attention led to significantly shorter MT, higher PV, shorter ttPV and more accuracy when reaching the target (SD_T) for both age groups. Also, EMG results showed that, with an external focus, APAs onset occurred earlier and APAs magnitude was more efficient. As predicted by Fitts’ Law, participants spent more time executing movements to targets with higher indices of difficulty. Older adults compared to young adults were more adversely affected by the increase of difficulty of the Fitts’ task, specifically, on measures of APAs. In conclusion, adopting an external focus of attention led to better overall movement performance when performing a lower extremity Fitts’ task. The task used in the present study can distinguish between APAs for older and young adults. We recommend that future studies expand on our findings in order to establish a performance-based objective measure of APAs to assess clinical interventions for postural control impairment.     

The autonomy and focus of attention strategies under distraction: Frequency and sample entropy analyses in a dynamic balance task

An external focus of attention has been shown to be effective in balance tasks. However, replication in applied settings is limited. The OPTIMAL theory proposes that a combination of autonomy and external focus increases focus to the task goal, and therefore more effective than external focus alone. However, research suggests that the combined effect is limited in discrete skills, and the increased focus effect is only reported by subjective assessment. The present study examined the effect of the combined strategy and its effect of “increased focus” compared to external focus and control groups under distraction. In experiment 1, participants (N = 60) practiced eight 35 s trials on a stabilometer followed by a 10 min-delayed retention test and an auditory distraction transfer test. The combined group chose a tape color to place on a stabilometer and was told to “keep the tapes parallel to the floor,” the external focus group was yoked with the combined group, and the control group was told to “do your best”. Performance was measured in Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). The increased focus effect was examined by both subjective (distraction score, a question about participants' perceptions) and objective (Mean Power Frequency, MPF, Sample entropy, SampEn) methods. Although participants improved significantly (p < .05), group differences were not observed during retention (p's > 0.05). An increased focus effect of the combined effect was not observed in any variables (p's > 0.05). In experiment 2, the practice duration was extended to replicate previous study designs (i.e., 90s trials; 2 days of practice; 24 h retention test; the number of participants). Consistent with experiment 1, group differences were not evident in RMSE, SampEn, and MPF (p's > 0.05). We suggest that autonomy may be required to be task-relevant, and simply telling to do best may be as useful as external focus or combined strategies in a continuous balance task. Further, the analysis showed that SampEn increased on Day 1 but decreased on Day 2, and MPF decreased within a session, but the average MPF increased by the day. Potential explanations and future directions when utilizing these metrics are discussed.     

The influence of attentional focus on the development of skill representation in a complex action

ObjectivesRecent research has indicated that performers' mental representation of a motor skill changes over the course of learning. In the present study, we sought to ascertain whether the type of instructions (instructions that emphasize either an internal or external focus of attention) influences the development of skill representation during motor learning.DesignParticipants without golf experience were recruited to practice a golf putting task over the course of three training days. Participants were randomly assigned to either an internal focus (focus on the swing of the arms; n = 10) or external focus (focus on the speed of the ball roll; n = 10) learning group. Changes in putting performance and mental representation structure were assessed over the course of learning, as well as during a follow-up retention test two days after practice.MethodsMental representation structure was measured employing the structural dimensional analysis of mental representations (SDA-M), which provided psychometric data on the structure of the mental representation in long-term memory. Additionally, the change in putting accuracy and consistency was recorded over the course of learning.ResultsFindings indicated that the external focus group performed with greater accuracy and consistency during training, and revealed a larger degree of development in their mental representation of the putting task.ConclusionsOverall, our findings suggest that facilitating the link between an action and its effect by means of an external focus is crucial for motor performance as well as the development of skill representation.     

Memory and metacognition for piano melodies: Illusory advantages of fixed- over random-order practice

Some learning schedules can foster an illusion of competence, whereby the learner feels that the skill will be retained better than it actually will be. Consider fixed-order practice, in which a person practices a task repeatedly before switching to the next task (e.g., task order A, A, B, B); in contrast, in random-order practice, a person randomly alternates among two or more tasks (e.g., task order C, D, D, C). In the present experiment, participants (n = 25) who had formal training in piano practiced melodies under fixed- or random-order conditions (within-subjects), and then returned for a retention test 2 days later. Initially, the participants performed faster on melodies practiced in a fixed-order. However, on a retention test 2 days later, participants were faster with melodies from the random-order condition. Despite the within-subjects design, which facilitated the comparison of practice conditions, participants’ metacognitive judgments indicated an illusion of competence, whereby they erroneously believed that fixed-order practice would result in faster retention performance. Our results suggest that even some trained musicians may use ease of acquisition as a heuristic for predicting future performance.