External Focus or Differential Learning: Is There an Additive Effect on Learning a Futsal Goal Kick?

(1) Background: How to optimally promote the process of acquiring and learning a new motor skill is still one of the fundamental questions often raised in training and movement science, rehabilitation, and physical education. This study is aimed at investigating the effects of differential learning (DL) and the elements of OPTIMAL theory on learning a goal-kicking skill in futsal, especially under the conditions of external and internal foci. (2) Methods: A total of 40 female beginners were randomly assigned to, and equally distributed among, five different interventions. Within a pretest and post-test design, with retention and transfer tests, participants practiced for 12 weeks, involving two 20-min sessions per week. The tests involved a kicking skill test. Data were analyzed with a one-way ANOVA. (3) Results: Statistically significant differences with large effect sizes were found between differential learning (DL) with an external focus, DL with an internal focus, DL with no focus, traditional training with an external focus, and traditional training with control groups in the post-, retention, and transfer tests. (4) Conclusions: The results indicate the clear advantages of DL. It is well worth putting further efforts into investigating a more differentiated application of instructions combined with exercises for DL.

How external and internal focus are used in the field: A review

The external focus and internal focus effects on motor performance and skill acquisition have been extensively examined and reviewed in laboratory research. However, the use of attentional focus in the field has not been summarized. Therefore, the present study conducted a systematic review of literature regarding the use of external/internal focus by practitioners (therapists and coaches) and recipients (patients and athletes). From 1999 to 2020, twelve studies examined how external/internal focus were used in the field. Results showed both therapists and coaches predominantly used internal focus; athletes tended to use more internal focus but varied by sports; and attentional focus varied between practice and competition. Additionally, the present review also consistently found that external/internal focus accounted for a small proportion relative to other foci outside the external/internal focus paradigm. Importantly, the differences in results were largely dependent upon the type of assessment ( e.g. closed-ended and open-ended questionnaires). Future research needs to investigate the relative importance of external/internal focus as opposed to other foci, as well as that affect a shift of attentional focus from one type to another.

Effects of Attentional Focus on Muscular Endurance: A Meta-Analysis

Several studies explored the effects of attentional focus on resistance exercise, but their analysed outcomes most commonly involved surface electromyography variables. Therefore, the effects of attentional focus on resistance exercise performance remain unclear. The aim of this review was to perform a meta-analysis examining the acute effects of external focus vs. internal focus vs. control on muscular endurance. Five databases were searched to find relevant studies. The data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. In the analysis for external vs. internal focus of attention, there were seven comparisons with 14 study groups. In the analyses for external focus vs. control and internal focus vs. control, there were six comparisons with 12 study groups. An external focus of attention enhanced muscular endurance when compared with an internal focus (Cohen’s d: 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34 and 0.82) and control (Cohen’s d: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.08 and 0.76). In the analysis for internal focus vs. control, there was no significant difference between the conditions (Cohen’s d: –0.19; 95% CI: –0.45 and 0.07). Generally, these results remained consistent in the subgroup analyses for upper-body vs. lower-body exercises. From a practical perspective, the results presented in this review suggest that individuals should use an external focus of attention for acute enhancement of muscular endurance.

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

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.

Acute and Long-Term Effects of Attentional Focus Strategies on Muscular Strength: A Meta-Analysis

This review aimed to perform a meta-analysis examining the following: (a) acute effects of adopting an internal focus vs. external focus of attention on muscular strength; and (b) long-term effects of adopting an internal focus vs. external focus of attention during resistance training on gains in muscular strength. We searched through five databases to find eligible studies. Random-effects meta-analyses of standardized mean differences were conducted to analyze the data. Ten studies were included. In the meta-analysis for the acute effects, there was a significant positive effect of external focus on muscular strength (standardized mean difference: 0.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.22, 0.46). In the meta-analysis for the long-term effects, there was no significant difference between training with an internal focus and external focus on muscular strength gains (standardized mean difference: 0.32; 95% confidence interval: –0.08, 0.73). In the subgroup analysis for lower-body exercises, we found a significant positive effect of training with an external focus on muscular strength gains (standardized mean difference: 0.47; 95% confidence interval: 0.07, 0.87). In summary, our findings indicate an acute increase in muscular strength when utilizing an external focus of attention. When applied over the long-term, using an external focus of attention may also enhance resistance training-induced gains in lower-body muscular strength.

Effects of an external compared to an internal focus of attention on the excitability of fast and slow(er) motor pathways

The neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the behavioural improvements usually associated with an external (EF) compared with an internal focus of attention (IF) remain poorly investigated. Surround inhibition in the primary cortex has been shown to be more pronounced with an EF, indicating a more spatial restriction of the motor command. However, the influence of different foci on the temporal aspect of the motor command, such as the modulation of fast versus slow(er) motor pathways, remains unknown and was therefore investigated in this study. Fourteen participants were asked to press on a pedal with the right foot to match its position with a target line displayed on a screen. The deviation of the pedal from the target line was used as a behavioural parameter and compared between both foci (EF vs IF). Additionally, conditioned H-reflexes were evoked during the motor task to assess the excitability of fast (direct) and slower (more indirect) motor pathways when adopting an EF or IF. With an EF compared to an IF, the motor performance was enhanced (P = .001; + 24%) and the activation of slow(er) motor pathways was reduced (P < 0.001, − 11.73%). These findings demonstrate for the first time that using different attentional strategies (EF and IF) has an influence on the excitability of slow(er) motor pathways. Together with the increased intracortical inhibition and surround inhibition known from previous studies, the diminished activation in the slow(er) motor pathways further explains why using an EF is a more economic strategy.

The periphery of vP in the theory of wh-in situ

This article outlines an implementation of Cable’s (2010) Grammar of Q that takes into account the role played by the periphery of vP, hitherto unexplored in this framework. Empirically, what I offer is a new example, in a new language family, of a known manifestation of wh-in situ: I indeed argue that Trevisan, a Northern Italian dialect, displays compulsory clause-internal focus movement of both wh-elements and contrastive foci. Theoretically, I use the Trevisan data to present a new, tweaked application of previously proposed approaches whereby wh-elements do not contribute to clause-typing and Q-particles are cross-linguistically needed in the computation of answer-seeking wh-questions. My claim is that wh-in situ languages are characterised not only by language-specific choices between projection and adjunction of Q and overt vs covert movement of Q, but also in terms of the loci where the features relevant to wh-questions, [q] and [focus], are checked: while some languages check both in C (‘feature bundling’), others make use of the clause-internal vP-periphery to check [focus] (‘feature scattering’). The theory developed in this article provides an innovative understanding of the mechanisms involved in Northern Italian wh-in situ: what it offers is a novel, economic understanding of the morphosyntax of this question-formation strategy that reduces all core properties to different combinations of the setting of simple, universal micro-parameters related to interrogative wh-movement.

The Effect of External Focus Attention Exercise On the Kinetic Risk Factors Associated With ACL Injury

Background and Aims One of the most common and dangerous injuries in sports is an Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) injury. Today, despite the ACL injury prevention programs, the prevalence of this injury remains high. Most of the instructions used in injury prevention programs are based on internal focus, while studies have shown that using external focus can improve performance in individuals. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of focus of attention on eight weeks of anterior cruciate ligament injury prevention training on landing skill kinetic variables in soccer players. Methods The current methodology included 35 players from 3 premier league teams in Tehran province. The teams were randomly divided into three groups of Prevent injury and Enhance Performance (PEP) exercises based on the External Focus (EF) (12 people), Internal Focus (IF) (12 people), and control group (11 people). In the pretest of ground reaction force, rate of loading, and time to stabilization during landing skill. The training groups performed pep injury prevention exercises for eight weeks and related instructions instead of warm-up exercises. Control group players were performing the regular activities. ANOVA with repeated measures and one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests were used to evaluate changes Results The test results showed significant changes in vertical, anterior-posterior ground reaction force and rate of loading in the external focus group (P≤0.05). But there was no critical difference in time to stabilization and internal-external ground reaction force. Conclusion According to the results, external focus instruction has positive effects on kinetic components. Therefore, it is recommended that exercises based on these instructions be used to reduce the risk of ACL injury and to repair this injury.