Full-text resources of PSJD and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results


2013 | 14 | 2 | 175-184

Article title

Analogy vs. Technical Learning in a Golf Putting Task: An Analysis of Performance Outcomes and Attentional Processes Under Pressure


Title variants

Languages of publication



Purpose It is assumed that analogy learning helps prevent individuals from choking under pressure by limiting the conscious control of movements when performing in high-pressure situations. The aim of the study was to extend the application of analogy learning to golf putting and include an assessment on the proposed mechanisms of analogy learning and performance under pressure. Methods. Golf novices learned a putting task either by technical instructions or with analogy. After the learning phase, the participants were tested under low- and high-pressure conditions. Attentional focus was measured using a dual-task paradigm based on a skill and an externally focused task. Results. Both groups showed an increase in putting accuracy under pressure while performance in both dual-tasks decreased under pressure. Despite a difference in verbal knowledge, no group differences were found in putting or dual-task performance. Conclusions. The results suggest that it does not matter if the skill is learned technically or by analogy with regard to performance under pressure










Physical description


1 - 06 - 2013
11 - 07 - 2013


  • Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany
  • Institute of Sports and Sport Science, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
  • Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany


  • 1. Baumeister R.F., Choking under pressure: Self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. J Pers Soc Psychol, 1984, 46 (3), 610-620, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.610.[Crossref]
  • 2. Beilock S.L., Gray R., Why do athletes choke under pressure? In: Tenenbaum G., Eklund R.C. (eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey 2007, 425-444.
  • 3. Strauss B., Choking under pressure: positive public expectations and decreases in performance [in German]. Zeitschriftfur experimentelle Psychologie, 1997, 44, 636-655.
  • 4. Baumeister R.F., Showers C.J., A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests. Eur J Soc Psychol, 1986, 16 (4), 361-383, doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420160405.[Crossref]
  • 5. Strauss B., Social facilitation in motor tasks: a review of research and theory. Psychol Sport Exerc, 2002, 3 (3), 237-256, doi: 10.1016/S1469-0292(01)00019-X.[Crossref]
  • 6. Eysenck M.W., Derakshan N., Santos R., Calvo M.G., Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 2007, 7 (2), 336-353, doi: 10.1037/1528 -3542.7.2.336.[Crossref][PubMed]
  • 7. Lewis B.P., Linder D.E., Thinking about choking? Attentional processes and paradoxical performance. Pers SocPsychol Bull, 1997, 23 (9), 937-944, doi: 10.1177/014616 7297239003.[Crossref]
  • 8. Wine J., Test anxiety and direction of attention. PsycholBull, 1971, 76 (2), 92-104, doi: 10.1037/h0031332.[Crossref]
  • 9. Beilock S.L., Carr T.H., When high-powered people fail: Working memory and “Choking under pressure” in math. Psychol Sci, 2005, 16 (2), 101-105, doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00789.x.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • 10. Beilock S.L., Kulp C.A., Holt L.E., Carr T.H., More on the fragility of performance: Choking under pressure in mathematical problem solving. J Exp Psychol: Gen, 2004, 133 (4), 584-600, doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.584.[Crossref]
  • 11. Beilock S.L., Carr T.H., On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs choking under pressure? J ExpPsychol: Gen, 2001, 130 (4), 701-725, doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.701.[Crossref]
  • 12. Gray R., Attending to the execution of a complex sensorimotor skill: Expertise differences, choking, and slumps. J Exp Psychol: Appl, 2004, 10 (1), 42-54, doi: 10.1037/ 1076-898X.10.1.42.[Crossref][PubMed]
  • 13. Beilock S.L., Carr T.H., MacMahon C., Starkes J.L., When paying attention becomes counterproductive: Impact of divided versus skill-focused attention on novice and experienced performance of sensorimotor skills. J ExpPsychol: Appl, 2002, 8 (1), 6-16, doi: 10.1037/1076-898 X.8.1.6.[Crossref]
  • 14. Jackson R.C., Ashford K.J., Norsworthy G., Attentional focus, dispositional reinvestment, and skilled motor performance under pressure. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2006, 28 (1), 40-68.
  • 15. Castaneda B., Gray R., Effects of focus of attention on baseball batting performance in players of differing skill levels. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2007, 29 (1), 60-77.
  • 16. Ford P., Hodges N.J., Williams A.M., Online attentionalfocus manipulations in a soccer-dribbling task: Implications for the proceduralization of motor skills. J MotBehav, 2005, 37 (5), 386-394, doi: 10.3200/JMBR .37.5. 386-394.[Crossref]
  • 17. Bell J.J., Hardy J., Effects of attentional focus on skilled performance in golf. J Appl Sport Psychol, 2009, 21 (2), 163-177, doi: 10.1080/10413200902795323.[Crossref]
  • 18. Schücker L., Hagemann N., Strauss B., Völker K., The effect of attentional focus on running economy. J Sports Sci, 2009,27(12), 1241-1248, doi: 10.1080/02640410903150467.[Crossref]
  • 19. Wulf G., Attentional focus and motor learning: A review of 10 years of research. E-Journal Bewegung und Training, 2007, 1, 1-64.
  • 20. Vance J., Wulf G., Töllner T., McNevin N., Mercer J., EMG activity as a function of the performer’s focus of attention. J Mot Behav, 2004, 36 (4), 450-459, doi: 10.3200/ JMBR .36.4.450-459.[Crossref]
  • 21. Zachry T., Wulf G., Mercer J., Bezodis N., Increased movement accuracy and reduced EMG activity as the result of adopting an external focus of attention. Brain Res Bull, 2005, 67 (4), 304-309, doi: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2005. 06.035.[Crossref]
  • 22. Masters R.S.W., Maxwell J.P., The theory of reinvestment. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol, 2008, 1 (2), 160-183, doi: 10.1080/17509840802287218.[Crossref]
  • 23. Masters R.S.W., Knowledge, knerves and know-how: The role of explicit versus implicit knowledge in the breakdown of a complex motor skill under pressure. Br J Psychol, 1992, 83 (3), 343-358, doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992. tb02446.x.[Crossref]
  • 24. Vickers J.N., Williams A.M., Performing under pressure: The effects of physiological arousal, cognitive anxiety, and gaze control in biathlon. J Mot Behav, 2007, 39 (5), 381-394, doi: 10.3200/JMBR .39.5.381-394.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 25. Gucciardi D.F., Dimmock J.A., Choking under pressure in sensorimotor skills: Conscious processing or depleted attentional resources? Psychol Sport Exerc, 2008, 9 (1), 45-59, doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.10.007.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 26. Oudejans R.R.D., Pijpers J.R., Training with mild anxiety may prevent choking under higher levels of anxiety. Psychol Sport Exerc, 2010, 11 (1), 44-50, doi: 10.1016/j. psychsport.2009.05.002.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 27. Cohn P.J., Preperformance Routines in Sport: Theoretical Support and Practical Applications. Sport Psychol, 1990, 4 (3), 301-312.
  • 28. Lonsdale C., Tam J.T.M., On the temporal and behavioural consistency of pre-performance routines: An intra-individual analysis of elite basketball players’ free throw shooting accuracy. J Sports Sci, 2008, 26 (3), 259-266, doi: 10.1080/02640410701473962.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 29. Jackson R.C., Willson R.J., Using ‘swing thoughts’ to prevent paradoxical performance effects in golf putting. In: Farrally M.R., Cochran A.J. (eds.), Science and golf III: Proceedings of the 1998 world scientific congress of golf. Human Kinetics, Leeds 1999, 166-173.
  • 30. Masters R.S.W., Theoretical aspects of implicit learning in sport. Int J Sport Psychol, 2000, 31 (4), 530-541.
  • 31. Liao C., Masters R.S.W., Analogy learning: A means to implicit motor learning. J Sports Sci, 2001, 19 (5), 307-319, doi: 10.1080/02640410152006081.[Crossref]
  • 32. Law J., Masters R., Bray S.R., Eves F.F., Bardswell I., Motor performance as a function of audience affability and metaknowledge. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2003, 25 (4), 484-500.
  • 33. Koedijker J.M., Oudejans R.R.D., Beek P.J., Table tennis performance following explicit and analogy learning over 10.000 repetitions. Int J Sport Psychol, 2008, 39 (3), 237-256.
  • 34. Lam W.K., Maxwell J.P., Masters R., Analogy learning and the performance of motor skills under pressure. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2009, 31 (3), 337-357.
  • 35. Lam W.K., Maxwell J.P., Masters R.S.W., Analogy versus explicit learning of a modified basketball shooting task: Performance and kinematic outcomes. J Sports Sci, 2009, 27 (2), 179-191, doi: 10.1080/02640410802448764.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 36. Schücker L., Ebbing L., Hagemann N., Learning by Analogies: Implications for performance and attentional processes under pressure. Hum Mov, 2010, 11 (2), 191-199, doi:10.2478/v10038-010-0025-z.[Crossref]
  • 37. Letzelter H., Letzelter M., Golftechniken: Wieso, weshalb, warum? [in German]. Philippka, Münster 2002.
  • 38. Poolton J.M., Maxwell J.P., Masters R.S.W., Raab M., Benefits of an external focus of attention: Common coding or conscious processing? J Sports Sci, 2006, 24 (1), 89-99, doi: 10.1080/02640410500130854.[Crossref]
  • 39. Cox R.H., Martens M.P., Russell W.D., Measuring anxiety in athletics: The Revised Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2003, 25 (4), 519-533.
  • 40. Kinrade N.P., Jackson R.C., Ashford K.J., Dispositional reinvestment and skill failure in cognitive and motor tasks. Psychol Sport Exerc, 2010, 11 (4), 312-319, doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.02.005.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 41. Ehrlenspiel F., Wei K., Sternad D., Open-loop, closed-loop and compensatory control: performance improvement under pressure in a rhythmic task. Exp Brain Res, 2010, 201 (4), 729-741, doi: 10.1007/s00221-009-2087-8.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 42. Zajonc R.B., Social facilitation. Science, 1965, 149 (3681), 269-274, doi: 10.1126/science.149.3681.269 .[Crossref]
  • 43. Koedijker J.M., Oudejans R.R.D., Beek P.J., Explicit rules and direction of attention in learning and performing the table tennis forehand. Int J Sport Psychol, 2007, 38 (2), 227-244.

Document Type

Publication order reference


YADDA identifier

JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.