PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
Journal
2010 | 11 | 2 | 191-199
Article title

Learning by Analogies: Implications for Performance and Attentional Processes Under Pressure

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Purpose. According to the self-focus theory of choking under pressure, conscious control of automated processes leads to a disruption of movement execution and deterioration in performance. In this study we examined whether analogy learning is a method to prevent choking under pressure. Basic procedures. Novice golfers learned the full swing over a period of six weeks either in a traditional way with technical instructions or with analogy instructions. Their performances were assessed in an indoor golf simulator. Attentional processes were measured using a dual task paradigm. Different kinds of learning instructions are linked to measures of skill-focused attention under low and high pressure conditions. Main findings. Performance scores in the dual task show that pressure leads to an increase in skill-focused attention of the technical learning group, compared to a decrease in skill-focused attention of the analogy learning group. Conclusions. Attentional processes under pressure are related to the method (analogy vs. technical instructions) implemented in the learning phase.
Publisher

Journal
Year
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
191-199
Physical description
Dates
published
1 - 12 - 2010
online
21 - 12 - 2010
Contributors
  • Institute of Sports Science, University of Münster, Germany
author
  • Institute of Sports Science, University of Münster, Germany
  • Institute of Sports and Sports Science, University of Kassel, Germany
References
  • Beilock S. L., Carr T. H., On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs choking under pressure? J Exp Psychol Gen, 2001, 130 (4), 701-725. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.701.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Baumeister R. F., Choking under pressure: self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. J Person Soc Psychol, 1984, 46 (3), 610-620.[Crossref]
  • 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.
  • 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.[WoS][Crossref]
  • 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.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Wine J., Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychol Bull, 1971, 76 (2), 92-104.[Crossref][PubMed]
  • 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.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Lewis B. P., Linder D. E., Thinking about choking? Attentional processes and paradoxical performance. Pers Soc Psychol B, 1997, 23 (9), 937-944.[Crossref]
  • 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 Exp Psychol Appl, 2002, 8 (1), 6-16. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.8.1.6.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • 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.
  • Ford P., Williams A. M., Hodges N. J., Online attentional-focus manipulations in a soccer-dribbling task: Implications for the proceduralization of motor skills. J Motor Behav, 2005, 37 (5), 386-394.[Crossref]
  • 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.
  • Beilock S. L., Bertenthal B. I., McCoy A. M., Carr T. H., Haste does not always make waste: Expertise, direction of attention, and speed versus accuracy in performing sensorimotor skills. Psychon Bull Rev, 2004, 11 (2), 373-379.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • 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, 343-358.
  • Masters R. S. W., Polman R. C. J., Hammond N. V., "Reinvestment": A dimension of personality implicated in skill breakdown under pressure. Pers Indiv Differ, 1993, 14 (5), 655-666.[Crossref]
  • 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]
  • Wulf G., Attentional focus and motor learning: A review of 10 years of research. Bewegung Training, 2007, 1, 1-64.
  • Wulf G., McNevin N., Shea C. H., The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus. Q J Exp Psychol, 2001, 54A (4), 1143-1154.
  • 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, 304-309. doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2005.06.035.[Crossref]
  • 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.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • 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.
  • Masters R. S. W., Theoretical aspects of implicit learning in sport. Int J Sport Psychol, 2000, 31, 530-541.
  • Liao C., Masters R. S. W., Analogy learning: A means to implicit motor learning. J Sports Sci, 2001, 19, 307-319.
  • Law J., Masters R. S. W., Bray S. R., Eves F., Bardswell I., Motor performance as a function of audience affability and metaknowledge. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2003, 25 (4), 484-500.
  • 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.[Crossref][WoS]
  • 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, 237-256.
  • Lehnertz K., Heuler O., Quirmbach S., The technique of the golf swing [in German]. Deutscher Golf Verband e.V. Lehrbrief 4, Albrecht Golf Verlag GmbH, Gräfelfing 2002.
  • Spearman M., Aim of golf. Visual-imagery lessons to improve every aspect of your game. Rodale, USA 2004.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.-psjd-doi-10_2478_v10038-010-0025-z
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.