A distal external focus of attention facilitates compensatory coordination of body parts.

Many studies have shown that focusing on an intended movement effect that is farther away from the body (distal external focus) results in performance benefits relative to focusing on an effect that is closer to the body (proximal external focus) or focusing on the body itself (internal focus) (see, Chua, Jimenez-Diaz, Lewthwaite, Kim & Wulf, 2021). Furthermore, the advantages of a distal external focus seem to be particularly pronounced in skilled performers (Singh & Wulf, 2020). The present study examined whether such benefits of more distal attentional focus may be associated with enhanced functional variability. Volleyball players (n = 20) performed 60 overhand volleyball serves to a target. Using a within-participants design, the effects of a distal external focus (bullseye), proximal external focus (ball) and an internal focus (hand) were compared. The distal focus condition resulted in significantly higher accuracy scores than did the proximal and internal focus conditions. In addition, uncontrolled manifold analysis showed that functional variability (as measured by the index of synergy) was greatest in the distal focus condition. These findings suggest that a distal external focus on the task goal may enhance movement outcomes by optimising compensatory coordination of body parts.

More bang for the buck: autonomy support increases muscular efficiency.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether conditions that provide performers with a sense of autonomy, by giving them choices, would increase movement efficiency. We evaluated neuromuscular activation as a function of choice, using surface electromyography (EMG), during isometric force production. Participants (N = 16) were asked to perform plantar flexions at each of three target torques (80%, 50%, 20% of maximum voluntary contractions) under both choice and control conditions. In the choice condition, they were able to choose the order of target torques, whereas the order was pre-determined in the control condition. Results demonstrated that while similar torques were produced under both conditions, EMG activity was lower in the choice relative to the control condition. Thus, providing performers with a choice led to reduced neuromuscular activity, or an increase in movement efficiency. This finding is in line with the notion that autonomy support readies the motor system for task execution by contributing to the coupling of goals and actions (Wulf and Lewthwaite, Psychon Bull Rev 23:1382-1414, 2016).

Autonomy enhances running efficiency.

Performer autonomy has been shown to contribute to effective motor performance and learning. Autonomy support is therefore a key factor in the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, 2016). The purpose of the present study was to examine whether supporting individuals' need for autonomy by giving them choices would increase movement efficiency. Such a finding would be consistent with the OPTIMAL theory prediction that autonomy facilitates the coupling of goals and actions. Participants (N = 32) were asked to run at a submaximal intensity (65% of VO2 max) for 20 minutes. Before the run, participants in a choice group were able to choose 5 of 10 photos as well as the order in which they would be shown to them on a computer screen during the run. Control group participants were shown the same photos, in the same order, chosen by their counterparts in the choice group. Throughout the run, oxygen consumption and heart rate were significantly lower in the choice group than the control group. Thus, providing autonomy support resulted in enhanced running efficiency. The present findings are in line with the notion that autonomy facilitates goal-action coupling.

Choices enhance punching performance of competitive kickboxers.

While self-controlled practice has been shown to enhance motor learning with various populations and novel tasks, it remains unclear if such effects would be found with athletes completing familiar tasks. Study 1 used a single case-study design with a world-champion kickboxer. We investigated whether giving the athlete a choice over the order of punches would affect punching velocity and impact force. Separated by 1 min of rest, the athlete completed 2 rounds of 12 single, maximal effort punches (lead straight, rear straight, lead hook and rear hook) delivered to a punching integrator in a counterbalanced order over six testing days. In one round the punches were delivered in a predetermined order while in the second round the order was self-selected by the athlete. In the choice condition, the world champion punched with greater velocities (6-11 %) and impact forces (5-10 %). In Study 2, the same testing procedures were repeated with 13 amateur male kickboxers over 2 testing days. Similar to Study 1, the athletes punched with significantly greater velocities (6 %, p < 0.05) and normalised impact forces (2 %, p < 0.05) in the choice condition. These findings complement research on autonomy support in motor learning by demonstrating immediate advantages in force production and velocity with experienced athletes.

An external focus of attention is a conditio sine qua non for athletes: a response to Carson, Collins, and Toner (2015).

In this invited response to a Letter to the Editor by Carson, Collins, and Toner (2015), I comment on various issues raised by the authors. I highlight the broad range of tasks and dependent measures used in studies comparing the effectiveness of external versus internal foci of attention. These studies--many of which involved sport skills--have consistently found performance or learning benefits when an external focus was adopted. There is no convincing evidence that performers' preferences, or their familiarity with a certain focus, have a moderating effect. Anecdotal evidence reported by coaches who have compared the two types of foci is consistent with research findings. An external focus presumably promotes functional connectivity and contributes to goal-action coupling.

Performance of gymnastics skill benefits from an external focus of attention.

The present study was designed to fill a gap in the literature on attentional focus and sports performance. Specifically, in contrast to most previous studies in which an external focus was directed at an implement, we used a gymnastics skill that did not involve the use of an implement. Furthermore, while most studies used only outcome measures of performance, we also assessed movement quality. Twelve-year-old gymnasts performed a maximum vertical jump with a 180-degree turn while airborne, with their hands crossing in front of their chest during the turn under three different focus conditions. Under the external focus condition, participants were asked to focus on the direction in which a tape marker, which was attached to their chest, was pointing after the turn. Under the internal focus condition, they were asked to focus on the direction in which their hands were pointing after the turn. Under the control condition, no focus instructions were given. The external focus condition resulted in both superior movement form and greater jump height than did the other two conditions, which produced comparable results. The present findings show that, similar to other tasks, the performance of form-based skills can be enhanced relatively easily by appropriate external focus instructions.

Additive benefits of external focus and enhanced performance expectancy for motor learning.

The authors examined the individual and combined influences of 2 factors that have been shown to benefit motor learning: an external focus of attention and enhanced performance expectancies. Another purpose of this study was to gain further insight into the mechanisms underlying these variables. In a factorial design, participants learning a novel motor skill (i.e., throwing with the non-dominant arm) were or were not given external focus instructions, and were or were not provided bogus positive social-comparative feedback to enhance their expectancies. This resulted in 4 groups: external focus, enhanced expectancy, external focus/enhanced expectancy and control. External focus instructions and enhanced expectancies had additive benefits for learning: the external focus/enhanced expectancy group demonstrated the greatest throwing accuracy on both retention and transfer tests, while the accuracy scores of the external focus and enhanced expectancy groups were lower, but higher than those of the control group. Furthermore, self-efficacy was increased by both external focus and enhanced expectancy, and predicted retention and transfer performance. Positive affect was heightened in the enhanced expectancy and external focus/enhanced expectancy groups after practice and predicted transfer performance. The findings suggest that the learning benefits of an external focus and enhanced expectancies mediate learning through partially different mechanisms.

Golf skill learning: An external focus of attention enhances performance and motivation.

An external focus of attention has been shown to enhance the performance and learning of motor skills, relative to an internal focus (see Chua, Jimenez-Diaz, Lewthwaite, Kim, & Wulf, 2021). In the present study, we examined possible motivational consequences of learners' experience of greater movement success with an external focus. Participants were asked to learn a golf pitch shot. In addition to measuring learning, we assessed self-efficacy, as well as positive and negative affect in groups that received external versus internal focus instructions. Furthermore, we examined the feasibility of providing several focus instructions in the same practice session as the learning of complex skills typically requires more than one instructional cue. The results showed that skill learning was enhanced by instructions that promoted external foci, as measured by golf shot accuracy on delayed retention and transfer tests. The external focus group also showed higher positive affect and reduced negative affect at the end of practice, and higher self-efficacy before retention testing, compared with the internal focus group. These findings provide support for several assumptions of the OPTIMAL theory (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016). From a practical perspective, they highlight the attentional and motivational benefits of an external focus.

Optimizing Motor Learning in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: According to the Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) theory of Wulf and Lewthwaite, enhanced expectancies (EE), autonomy support (AS), and an external focus (EF) of attention facilitate motor performance and learning. The present study examined whether consecutive implementation of EE, AS, and EF during practice would enhance the learning of a square-stepping task in older adults. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to optimized and control groups. After the pretest, 1 of the 3 factors was implemented during each of the three 12-trial practice blocks, in a counterbalanced order, in the optimized group: positive feedback (EE), choice of mat color (AS), and instructions to focus on the squares (EF). Control group participants practiced without any of these factors. RESULTS: Results indicated that the optimized group had faster movement times than the control group during the practice phase and on 24-hr retention and transfer tests. DISCUSSION: The key variables in the OPTIMAL theory can be applied sequentially in order to facilitate motor performance and learning in older adults.

Dual-task practice enhances motor learning: a preliminary investigation.

Practicing a motor task under dual-task conditions can be beneficial to motor learning when the secondary task is difficult (Roche et al. in Percept Psychophys 69(4):513-522, 2007) or when it engages similar processes as the primary motor task (Hemond et al. in J Neurosci 30(2):650-654, 2010). The purpose of this pilot study was to determine which factor, difficulty level or engaged processes, of a secondary task is more critical in determining dual-task benefit. Participants practiced a discrete arm task in conjunction with an audio-vocal reaction time (RT) task. We presented two different RT tasks that differed in difficulty, simple versus choice (i.e., more difficult), at two different arm task phases that differed in engaged processes, preparation versus execution, resulting in four dual-task conditions. A simple RT task is thought to predominantly engage motor execution processes, therefore would engage similar processes as the arm movement task when it is presented during the execution phase, while a choice RT task is thought to engage planning processes and therefore would engage similar processes too when it is presented during the preparation phase. Enhanced motor learning was found in those who engaged similar process as the primary task during dual-tasking (i.e., choice RT presented during preparation and simple RT presented during execution). Moreover, those who showed enhanced learning also demonstrated high dual-task cost (poor RT task performance) during practice, indicating that both tasks were taxing the same resource pool possibly due to engaging similar cognitive processes. To further test the relation between dual-task cost and enhanced learning, we delayed the presentation timing of the choice RT task during the preparation phase and the simple RT task during the execution phase in two control experiments. Dual-task cost was reduced in these delayed timing conditions, and the enhanced learning effect was attenuated. Together, our preliminary findings suggest that it is the similarity hypothesis and not the difficulty hypothesis that mediates the enhanced motor learning under dual-task conditions.

Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners.

We followed up on recent findings demonstrating that enhancing performers' expectancies can improve their performance. Specifically, we examined whether providing experienced runners with positive feedback regarding their movement efficiency would increase running efficiency. Two groups of experienced runners ran on a treadmill at 75% of their maximum oxygen consumption (VO(2max)) for 10 min. One group (enhanced expectancy) was provided with (fabricated) feedback about the efficiency of their running style every 2 min. A control group was not given feedback. Oxygen consumption decreased in the enhanced expectancy group across measurement times (every 2 min for 10 min), but remained the same in the control group. In addition, performance perceptions changed only in the enhanced expectancy group, indicating a perception of greater ease of running and reduced fatigue when assessed after compared with before running. Finally, positive affect increased from a pre- to a post-test in the enhanced expectancy group, in contrast to the control group. Our findings show that enhanced expectancies can have a positive effect on movement efficiency and running experience. They add to the accumulating evidence for the social-cognitive-affective-motor nature of motor performance.

Mind over body: Creating an external focus for sport skills.

In a recent study examining the efficacy of different external foci (Singh and Wulf [2020]. The distance effect and level of expertise: Is the optimal external focus different for low-skilled and high-skilled performers? Human Movement Science, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102663), an external focus instruction referred to parts of the body (arms). Specifically, the image of a "platform" was used to describe the area between the wrists and elbows when passing a volleyball. The present study followed up on that study by addressing the question whether a focus on an image that represents a body part (platform) would be more effective than a focus on the body parts (arms) themselves (i.e. internal focus). In a within-participant design, novice volleyball players continuously passed a volleyball to a target on the wall. Participants completed eight 45-s trials under each of the external ("focus on your platform") and internal focus ("focus on your arms") conditions, performed in a counterbalanced order. The results showed that the total score (i.e. sum of scores over 45 s) was significantly higher when participants focused on the platform rather than their arms. Thus, invoking an image of an external object that "replaces" a body part can serve to promote an external focus that results in immediate performance advantages compared with an internal focus on the same body part. The findings suggest that instructors within a range of applied settings can creatively use such images to facilitate the performance of motor skills.Highlights The image of an object ("platform") is used to promote an external focus in volleyball.Novice volleyball players pass a ball to a target with a focus on the platform versus arms.Passing accuracy is superior with an external (platform) relative to an internal focus (arms).Using the image of an object to "replace" a body part can promote an external focus of attention.

Superiority of external attentional focus for motor performance and learning: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Considerable literature on the role of attentional focus in motor performance and learning has accumulated for over two decades. We report the results of comprehensive meta-analyses that address the impact of an external focus (EF, on intended movement effects) versus internal focus (IF, on movements of body parts) of attention on the performance and learning of motor skills. Values of effect sizes (ES) from 73 studies with 1,824 participants and 40 studies with 1,274 participants were used for examining the effects of EF versus IF on behavioral outcomes of motor performance and learning (separately for retention and transfer phases) respectively. The EF condition was more effective than the IF condition for performance, Hedges' g value = 0.264 (95% CI [0.217, 0.310]), retention learning, Hedges' g value = 0.583 (95% CI [0.425, 0.741]), and transfer learning, Hedges' g value = 0.584 (95% CI [0.325, 0.842]). Multivariable metaregression analyses on behavioral measures further indicated that neither age group, health status, or skill level, nor their two-way interactions, moderated the ES differences between EF and IF in performance, retention, and transfer models (all p > .100). A secondary analysis on 12 studies with 216 participants that examined the effects of EF versus IF on electromyographic outcomes of motor performance also indicated that EF was associated with more efficient neuromuscular processing, Hedges' g value = 0.833 (95% CI [0.453, 1.213]). From nine studies with 272 participants, performance measured by behavioral outcomes was found to be more effective when a more distal, rather than proximal, EF was used, Hedges' g value = 0.224 (95% CI [0.019, 0.429]). Overall, the meta-analytic results are consistent with prior narrative reviews and indicate that an external focus is superior to an internal focus whether considering tests of motor performance or learning, and regardless of age, health condition, and level of skill expertise. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors.

OBJECTIVES: Findings from the contemporary psychological and movement science literature that appear to have implications for medical training are reviewed. Specifically, the review focuses on four factors that have been shown to enhance the learning of motor skills: observational practice; the learner's focus of attention; feedback, and self-controlled practice. OBSERVATIONAL PRACTICE: Observation of others, particularly when it is combined with physical practice, can make important contributions to learning. This includes dyad practice (i.e. practice in pairs), which is not only cost-effective, but can also enhance learning. FOCUS OF ATTENTION: Studies examining the role of the performer's focus of attention have consistently demonstrated that instructions inducing an external focus (directed at the movement effect) are more effective than those promoting an internal focus (directed at the performer's body movements). An external focus facilitates automaticity in motor control and promotes movement efficiency. FEEDBACK: Feedback not only has an informational function, but also has motivational properties that have an important influence on learning. For example, feedback after successful trials and social-comparative (normative) feedback indicating better than average performance have been shown to have a beneficial effect on learning. SELF-CONTROLLED PRACTICE: Self-controlled practice, including feedback and model demonstrations controlled by the learner, has been found to be more effective than externally controlled practice conditions. CONCLUSIONS: All factors reviewed in this article appear to have both informational and motivational influences on learning. The findings seem to reflect general learning principles and are assumed to have relatively broad applicability. Therefore, the consideration of these factors in designing procedures for medical training has the potential to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of training.

The distance effect and level of expertise: Is the optimal external focus different for low-skilled and high-skilled performers?

Focusing attention on a movement effect that is farther away from the body (distal external focus) has been shown to result in more effective motor performance or learning than focusing on an effect that is in greater proximity to the body (proximal focus). The present study examined whether the distance of the external focus impacts the performance of relatively inexperienced and experienced performers differently. Low-skilled and high-skilled volleyball players passed a volleyball continuously to a target. In the proximal focus condition they were asked to concentrate on the "platform," whereas in the distal focus condition they were instructed to concentrate on the target. The high-skilled group's accuracy scores were higher in the distal relative to proximal focus condition. However, low-skilled players' accuracy scores was greater in the proximal relative to distal focus condition. We argue that the optimal distance of the external focus depends on the level of expertise when the skill requires a specific movement technique. An external focus on that technique seems to be more advantageous for low-skilled performers. In contrast, when the movement pattern has become more automatic (high-skilled performers), a focus on the overall movement effect is more beneficial.

Forward thinking: When a distal external focus makes you faster.

Studies have demonstrated a benefit to performance and learning of a distal relative to a proximal external focus of attention. That is, focusing on a movement effect that occurs at a greater distance from the body has been found to be more effective than concentrating on a movement effect closer to the body. The present study examined the distance effect in skilled kayakers performing an open, continuous skill. Participants (n = 27) performed a wild water racing sprint of 100 m on Class 2 water. Using a within-participants design, a distal external focus ("Focus on the finish") was compared to a proximal external focus ("Focus on the paddle") as well as to a control condition. The distal focus condition (30.63 s, SD = 3.21) resulted in significantly shorter sprint times than did the proximal (32.07 s, SD = 3.27) and the control (31.96 s, SD = 3.58) conditions (ps < 0.001). The effect size was large (ηp2 = 0.53). There was no significant difference between the proximal and control condition (p = 1.00). The findings demonstrate the importance of adopting a distal, rather than proximal, external focus for skilled athletes performing open, continuous skills under time pressure.

Choose your words wisely: Optimizing impacts on standardized performance testing.

BACKGROUND: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (an external attentional focus, EF) factors that affect motor performance and learning [1]. One implication of this theory is that standardized clinical and laboratory assessments of physical capacity and motor performance that do not incorporate optimizing conditions may underestimate true maximal capabilities. The influence of "optimized" conditions on a clinical-applied test of balance control was examined with healthy participants. Given the motor performance benefits of optimized conditions predicted by the OPTIMAL theory, it was hypothesized that providing participants with information that induced EE, provided them with AS, and promoted their use of EF would reduce balance errors and postural sway. METHODS: We used as an exemplar assessment, the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), and center-of-pressure (COP) velocity measurements of postural sway. Participants performed under two different conditions, separated by two days: an optimized (EE, AS, and EF) condition and a control ("neutral") condition, with sample-wide order counterbalancing. In each condition, participants performed three stances (double-leg, single-leg, and tandem) on two support surfaces (firm and foam). Stance order was participant-determined in the optimized condition and, for the control condition, yoked to a participant in the optimized condition. RESULTS: Participants committed fewer balance errors in the optimized condition than in the control condition (p < .001) and their resultant COP velocity in the optimized condition was lower than that in the control condition (p = .004). BESS scores were correlated with resultant COP velocity (r = .593, p < .001). SIGNIFICANCE: Our results demonstrated the impact of implementing optimized, as opposed to "neutral" control, conditions for better insight into balance capabilities in normal and challenging situations. Practitioners' roles in mediating test situations and using subtle wording to promote optimized performance may have consequential impacts on motor assessment outcomes.

Maximal force production requires OPTIMAL conditions.

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies several motivational and attentional factors that draw out latent motor performance capabilities. One implication of the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) is that standardized motor performance assessments likely do not reflect maximal capabilities unless they are "optimized" with appropriate testing conditions. The present study examined the effects of three key motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (external focus, EF) variables in the OPTIMAL theory on maximum force production. In Experiment 1, a handgrip strength task was used. EE, AS, and EF were implemented, in a counterbalanced order, on consecutive trial blocks in an optimized group. A control group performed all blocks under neutral conditions. While there were no group differences on Block 1 (baseline), the optimized group outperformed the control group on all other blocks. In Experiment 2, participants performed two one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat lift tests, separated by one week. Two groups, an optimized group and control group, had similar 1-RM values on the first test performed under neutral conditions. However, on the second test, a group performing under optimized conditions (EE, AS, EF) showed an increase in 1-RM, while there was no change from the first to the second test for a control group. We argue that standard test conditions may not produce true maximal performance. The findings corroborate the importance of key factors in the OPTIMAL theory and should be applied to ensure accurate strength performance assessment.

Conceptions of ability affect motor learning.

The authors examined the effects of induced conceptions of ability on motor learning. Participants in 3 groups practiced a balance task after receiving instructions suggesting that the task would reflect an inherent ability (IA group), represent an acquirable skill (AS group), or no ability-related instructions (control group). Across 2 days of practice, the AS and IA groups showed greater improvement in performance compared with the control group. For the retention test on Day 3, the AS group tended to demonstrate generally more effective balance performance than the control group and increasingly greater effectiveness compared with the IA group. Moreover, AS group participants made higher-frequency (reflexive) movement adjustments than participants of the other 2 groups, indicating a greater automaticity in the control of their movements. Thus, learning was enhanced by instructions portraying the task as a learnable skill, rather than revealing a fixed inherent capacity or no instructions (control group).

Increased jump height with an external focus due to enhanced lower extremity joint kinetics.

Individuals jump higher when they adopt an external focus of attention, relative to an internal focus or no focus of attention (G. Wulf, T. Zachry, C. Granados, & J. S. Dufek, 2007). In the present study, the authors determined the underlying cause of this effect. Participants performed a vertical jump-and-reach task for (a) an external focus condition (i.e., participants focused on the rungs of a Vertec [Perform Better, Cranston, RI] measurement device that they touched) and (b) an internal focus condition (i.e., participants focused on the finger with which they touched the rungs). Participants' jump height, center-of-mass displacement, jump impulse, and lower extremity joint moments were greater with an external focus compared with an internal focus. These results suggest that participants jump higher by producing greater forces when they adopt an external focus. This finding adds to evidence that an external focus facilitates the production of effective and efficient movement patterns.