scholarly journals Empirical Evidence for the Functionality Hypothesis in Motor Learning: The Effect of an Attentional Focus Is Task Dependent

Psych ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 868-889
Author(s):  
Svetlana Wähnert ◽  
Gisela Müller-Plath

A large body of research suggests that during learning motor skills, focusing on environmental effects of the movement (external focus) generally leads to better performance than focusing on one’s own body (internal focus). The functionality hypothesis states, in contrast, that the superiority of any attentional focus is task dependent. The present study aimed to test the predictions of the latter and searched for underlying mechanisms and task characteristics for one or the other focus being more functional. In Experiment 1, we examined whether the internal focus is superior in a difficult body-oriented balance task. In Experiment 2, we added visual feedback and investigated whether this would enhance the functionality of the external focus. In both experiments, the participants stood one-legged on a balance board and had to shift their centre of pressure (COP) to predefined target points. Per instruction, they were asked to interpret their attentional focus on the COP as either internal (the sole of the foot) or external (the platform). In Experiment 1, the external focus was induced through a mental image. The internal focus group performed significantly better, thereby supporting the functionality hypothesis. In Experiment 2, the COP was dynamically visualized on a screen. The internal focus superiority vanished. We suggest that the internal focus is more functional in motor-learning situations that provide more effect information through body-internal senses than through body-external senses. In these cases, the external focus hampers learning because it is associated with additional cognitive load.

2001 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1143-1154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Wulf ◽  
Nancy McNevin ◽  
Charles H. Shea

The present experiment was designed to test the predictions of the constrained-action hypothesis. This hypothesis proposes that when performers utilize an internal focus of attention (focus on their movements) they may actually constrain or interfere with automatic control processes that would normally regulate the movement, whereas an external focus of attention (focus on the movement effect) allows the motor system to more naturally self-organize. To test this hypothesis, a dynamic balance task (stabilometer) was used with participants instructed to adopt either an internal or external focus of attention. Consistent with earlier experiments, the external focus group produced generally smaller balance errors than did the internal focus group and responded at a higher frequency indicating higher confluence between voluntary and reflexive mechanisms. In addition, probe reaction times (RTs) were taken as a measure of the attention demands required under the two attentional focus conditions. Consistent with the hypothesis, the external focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did the internal focus participants, indicating a higher degree of automaticity and less conscious interference in the control processes associated with the balance task.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 651-657
Author(s):  
Kevin A Becker ◽  
Jeffrey T Fairbrother

Attentional focus research consistently suggests that the use of an external focus of attention improves motor learning and performance relative to an internal focus. It appears, however, that external focus cues are not frequently adopted in applied sport settings. One issue that may contribute to this disparity relates to variability in how cues are employed in research and practice. Experimental research tends to use a single-cue approach, while in sports, athletes often sample several cues within the same practice. A limitation of the single-cue approach is that attentional focus effects could be due either to focus direction (internal vs. external) or to the relative effectiveness of a particular cue (e.g. an effective externally focused cue vs. an ineffective internally focused cue). This study tested whether external focus benefits generalize to situations in which participants use multiple cues of the same type throughout acquisition. Volunteers ( N = 22) learned a dart throwing task while using three internally or externally focused cues. Results indicated an external focus led to lower error scores during acquisition and a delayed retention test ( p’s < .05). These results demonstrate that the external focus benefit generalizes to situations where a performer uses multiple cues.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 148-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louisa D. Raisbeck ◽  
Jed A. Diekfuss

Performance benefits exist for an external focus of attention compared with an internal focus of attention for performance and learning (Wulf, 2013). It is unknown, however, if varying the number of verbal cues affects learning and performance. Focus of attention and the number of verbal cues were manipulated during a simulated handgun-shooting task. For the internal focus conditions, participants were told to focus on their hand, arm, and wrist, whereas the external focus instructions were to focus on the gun, gun barrel, and gun stock. To manipulate the number of verbal cues, participants received instruction to focus on a single verbal cue or multiple verbal cues. Shooting performance was assessed at baseline, acquisition, and at two separate retention phases (immediate, delayed) that included transfer tests. Participants completed the NASA—Task Load Index to assess workload following all trials. Participants who received one verbal cue performed significantly better during immediate retention than those who received three verbal cues. Participants who used external focus of attention instructions had higher performance and reported less workload at delayed retention compared to those who used internal focus instructions. This research provides further support for the benefits of an external focus and highlights the importance of minimizing the number of verbal cues.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Somaye Roshandel ◽  
Hamidreza Taheri ◽  
Amir Moghadam

Recent evidence supports advantages of an external focus of attention on learning motor skills, however, there is a need to retest these finding for children and comparing them with adults. Thus, the purpose of current study was to determine the effect of different attentional focus on learning a motor skill in children and adults. Thirty children (8-12 year) and thirty adults (25-42 years) were randomly assigned to one of four groups: (1) Children external focus of attention (EFA), (2) Children- internal focus of attention (IFA), (3) Adults- External focus of attention (EFA), (4) Adults- internal focus of attention (IFA). Following initial instructions and task demonstration, participants performed 60 darts throwing in six blocks and 24 hours later performed 10 additional throws for retention test. Results revealed that children benefited from EFA and IFA instruction in the same manner, however, adults benefited from EFA more than IFA instruction. Future studies should continue to examine effects of different attentional focus on other skills.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-13
Author(s):  
Sima Razaghi ◽  
Esmaeel Saemi ◽  
Rasool Abedanzadeh

AbstractIntroduction. External focus instruction and self-controlled feedback have beneficial effects on motor learning. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the benefits of combined effects of external focus instruction and self-controlled feedback on balance performance in older adults.Material and Methods. Forty older adults (mean age: 63.21 ± 3.6 years; all female) were selected and randomly divided into 4 groups: self-controlled feedback, external attention, external attention/self-controlled feedback and control group. The task of standing on the platform of the stabilometer device and trying to keep the platform horizontally as much as possible was performed in each 30-sec. trial. The participants of self-controlled group received feedback on the timing of balance after the trials. In the external focus of attention, participants noticed the signs that were located horizontally ahead of their feet. The test was conducted in two sessions. In the acquisition phase, 10 trials of 30 seconds were performed and the retention test was completed 24 hours later as 5 trials of 30 seconds.Results. The results of mixed ANOVA on time data as an indicator of balance in the acquisition phase showed that the mixed group of external focus of attention and self-controlled feedback had better performance than the other groups (p = 0.004). In the retention test, the results of mixed ANOVA showed that the participants in the combined group of external focus and self-controlled feedback had better performance than the other groups (p = 0.006). The external focus of attention and self-controlled feedback performed similarly, and both were superior to the control group (p < 0.05).Conclusions. The results of this study, supporting the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in the elderly, showed that the combination of two factors of external focus and self-controlled feedback has a double advantage over the presence of each of the factors. Therefore, it is suggested that the combinations of external focus instructions and self-controlled feedback should be used to improve performance and motor learning in the classes of practical and clinical rehabilitation fields.


2019 ◽  
Vol 126 (3) ◽  
pp. 446-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Kunimura ◽  
Masakazu Matsuoka ◽  
Naoki Hamada ◽  
Koichi Hiraoka

The present study examined whether an internal or external attentional focus would affect participants’ feet-in-place balance response to postural stance perturbations. A movable platform automatically slid forward or backward while healthy participants stood on it and (a) performed no cognitive activity (control), (b) focused on the pelvis or upper body sway (internal focus), (c) memorized a number displayed immediately before the platform slid (external focus), or (d) kept the equilibrium of an unstable cylinder over the arm (external focus). The forward displacement of the pelvis induced by the platform sliding forward was smaller when participants focused on their pelvic sway, although such effect was absent when they focused on their upper body sway, indicating that the internal focus was effective for the postural response when attention was paid to the pelvic sway. Regarding an external attention focus, the forward displacement of the pelvis induced by the platform sliding forward was smaller when participants focused on the equilibrium of an unstable object over the arm, but this effect was absent when they focused on the number, indicating that an external focus was only effective when the unstable object focused upon was relevant to the equilibrium of one’s own body. No attentional intervention was effective during backward sliding of the support surface, indicating that central set for responding to postural perturbation depends on the direction of the postural perturbation.


2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Wulf ◽  
Sebastian Wächter ◽  
Stefan Wortmann

Recently, researchers in the motor learning area have shown that instructions to direct the learner’s attention to their body movements (i.e., induce an internal focus) – such as those typically used in applied settings – are less effective than instructions directing attention to the movement effects (i.e., inducing an external focus). Under the assumption that females tend to be more concerned about performing a movement correctly than males, who might be more inclined to focus on the outcome of their actions, the purpose of the present study was to examine whether females would benefit more from external-focus instructions than males. Female and male high-school students practiced a soccer instep kick with instructions that either induced an internal or external focus of attention. Subsequent retention (stationary ball) and transfer (moving ball) tests without instructions were performed to assess learning. The female group that was given internal-focus instructions during practice showed a greater performance decrement from retention to transfer than all other groups. This provides support for the view that the type of attentional focus induced by instructions might be particularly relevant for females, and that females might show greater learning advantages when provided with external-focus instructions.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott W. Ducharme ◽  
Will F.W. Wu

An external focus of attention has been shown to improve balance measures during static postural tasks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different attentional focus strategies in response to a perturbation while performing a dynamic balance task. Participants (n = 29) performed a dynamic balance task that consisted of stepping onto an uneven surface while attempting to continuously walk in a straight line. The orientation of the surface was unknown to the participants. During the external focus conditions, participants were instructed to focus on the surface they walked on. During the internal focus conditions, participants were instructed to focus on keeping their body over their feet. Analyses revealed that the external focus condition exhibited significantly less lateral displacement from the intended walking line following the perturbation (4.56 ± 2.56 cm) than the internal (5.61 ± 2.89 cm, p = .019) and baseline (6.07 ± 2.6 cm, p = .004) conditions. These data indicate that participants were more resilient to the perturbing surface when their attention was focused on external information. Thus, participants were able to respond to a perturbation more effectively when utilizing an external focus of attention.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-468
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Almonroeder ◽  
Emily Watkins ◽  
Tricia Widenhoefer

Context: The bodyweight squat exercise is a common component for treatment and prevention of patellofemoral pain; however, it can also place a high load on the patellofemoral joint. Restricting anterior motion of the knees relative to the toes during squatting appears to reduce patellofemoral loading. However, exercise professionals typically rely on verbal instructions to alter squat technique. Objective: To evaluate the influence of verbal instructions regarding squat technique on patellofemoral joint loading. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Motion analysis laboratory. Participants: Eleven uninjured females. Intervention: Participants performed bodyweight squats before (baseline) and after receiving verbal instructions to limit anterior knee motion. Two different types of verbal instruction were used, one intended to promote an internal focus of attention and the other intended to promote an external focus of attention. Three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were recorded using a multicamera system and force plate. Main Outcome Measures: Sagittal plane patellofemoral joint forces and stress were estimated using a musculoskeletal model. Results: Participants demonstrated a reduction in patellofemoral joint forces (35.4 vs 31.3 N/kg; P = .01) and stress (10.7 vs 9.2 mPa; P = .002) after receiving instructions promoting an internal focus of attention, compared with their baseline trials. Participants also demonstrated a reduction in patellofemoral joint forces (35.4 vs 32.3 N/kg; P = .03) and stress (10.7 vs 9.6 mPa; P = .04) after receiving instructions promoting an external focus of attention (vs baseline). However, there were no significant differences in patellofemoral forces (P = .84) or stress (P = .41) for trials performed with an internal versus external attentional focus. Conclusion: It appears that verbal instruction regarding knee position influences patellofemoral joint loading during squatting.


2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adina Mornell ◽  
Gabriele Wulf

Two experiments are reported in which skilled musicians playing different instruments performed a piece of their choice under various attentional focus conditions. In the external focus condition, they were asked to focus on playing for the audience and the expressive sound of the music. In the internal focus condition, they were asked to focus on the precision of their finger movements (or lip movements for singers) and correct notes. In the control condition, they were asked to play the way they normally did. Expert raters evaluated the musicians’ performances for both musical expression and technical precision. In Experiment 1, external focus instructions enhanced musical expression relative to both internal focus and control conditions. There was no effect on technical precision. In Experiment 2, raters were given more detailed evaluation criteria. An external focus again led to superior musical expression compared with internal focus and control conditions. In addition, technical precision was higher within the external relative to the internal focus condition. The findings show that the advantages of focusing on the intended movement effect (i.e., externally) generalize to experienced musicians. Music teachers could offer their students specific recommendations for focus of attention during training and in concert situations to optimize learning and performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document