This is the final blog of a three part
series on focus of attention. The previous blogs examined concepts of focus
within a sporting context and examined the efficacy of research methodologies.
In the previous blogs it was concluded that adopting an external relative to an
internal focus of attention to be advantageous for motor learning and
performance of motor skills. Furthermore, if we cannot accurately measure and
quantify focus of attention, we cannot say that observed differences in
performance measures are a direct result of changing focus of attention.
Therefore, the aim of this blog is to explore solutions to the issue of
measurement of direction of focus and will include recommendations for future
research. This blog will examine the utility of using integrated
electromyography (EMG) as a means explaining observed performance benefits in
utilisation of external relative to internal focus of attention. Table
1 summarises findings on focus of attention research methodologies and
findings.
Table 1. Displays author and year, skill/sport and
research measurement strategies utilised in each of the previous literature (An
* indicates incorporation of measurement strategy in corresponding column).
Authors
|
Skill/Sport
|
Performance
Outcome
|
EMG
|
Kinematics
|
Castaneda and Gray
(2007)
|
baseball
|
*
|
||
Freudenheim et. al
(2010)
|
swimming
|
*
|
||
Ille et. al (2013)
|
sprinting
|
*
|
||
Lohse et. al (2010)
|
darts
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
Lohse and Sherwood
(2012)
|
plantar flexion
|
*
|
||
Manojlovic and
Erculj (2013)
|
vertical jump
|
*
|
||
Schucker et. al
(2009)
|
running
|
*
|
||
Shea and Wulf (1999)
|
balance
|
*
|
||
Vance et. al (2010)
|
bicep curl
|
*
|
||
Wulf et. al (2010)
|
vertical jump
|
*
|
*
|
|
Wulf et. al (2013)
|
golf
|
*
|
||
Zachry et. al (2005)
|
basketball
|
*
|
*
|
|
Zarghami et. al
(2012)
|
discus
|
*
|
||
Zentgraf and
Munzert (2009)
|
juggling
|
*
|
*
|
There is clearly an advantage of
externally focusing attention during performance of motor skills (Freudenheim
et. al 2010, Ille et. al 2013, Wulf et al. 1999, Zarghami et al. 2012). However,
to assess motor learning and performance in previous studies researchers have
exclusively used outcome measures such as distance from a target in golf shots
(Wulf et. al, 2013). Incorporating concrete measures of focus into studies in
conjunction with performance measures would improve research methodologies. One
example of a measure of focus is the use of EMG. Vance et. al (2010) wanted to
examine whether performance differences between an internal and external focus
conditions would also be observed at a neuromuscular level. Participants from
this study performed bicep curls under internal and external focus conditions. Under
internal focus conditions, participants were instructed to concentrate on their
arms, whereas under external focus conditions they were instructed to focus on
the curl bar. Results showed that EMG was significantly higher under internal
rather than external conditions, demonstrating a physiological measure of
focus. Although findings from this study are consistent with those of blog one,
the use of EMG provides a solution to the efficacy of methodologies as
discussed in blog two.
Similar to the aforementioned study,
Lohse et. al (2010) examined performance measures in conjunction with EMG activity
and a kinematic analysis between internal and external focus conditions for a
dart throw. As expected, performance measures were higher under the external
focus condition when compared to the internal. Similar to Vance et. al (2010),
it was found that EMG was significantly reduced in the external condition when compared
to the internal and movement economy to be higher in the external group. Again,
including the physiological measures of EMG and a kinematic analysis alleviates
issues with measurement of focus discussed in blog two and increases the utility
of research methodologies. These findings are consistent with two more studies
that found increased vertical jump height and reduced EMG activity for the
external focus group (Wulf et. al, 2010) and reduced EMG and greater movement
accuracy in utilising an external focus for a basketball free throw (Zachry et.
al, 2005). Differences in performance measures were to be expected; however,
using EMG rather than exclusively using performance measures offers a solution
to the issue of measuring of focus.
In
conclusion, incorporating EMG and kinematic analyses into studies of focus of
attention allows researchers to draw conclusions about performance differences
in each of the focus conditions. Previous to utilising EMG and kinematics,
conclusions were based solely on performance outcomes where direction of focus
was not accurately measured. Both analyses of EMG and kinematics are not direct
measures of focus of attention; however, they are physiological measures and
allow us to better explain performance differences that would otherwise be
described as correlations rather than psychological concepts. Measurement of
muscle electrical activity and movement kinematics increases validity and
reliability of research.
Future
research into the direction of focus of attention should aim to examine
measurements of focus in order to ensure best practice. Whilst EMG made provide
some clarity as to the physiological differences between focal conditions,
using this measure in conjunction with other methods may enhance our
understanding of focus and its role in the sporting context. Future studies my
look at the use of electroencephalography (EEG) to investigate voltage
fluctuations in the brain under different focus conditions. This will allow accurate
conclusions to be made about focus within a sporting context and more
practically aid in improving motor learning and performance.
References
Castaneda, B., & Gray, R. (2007). Effects
of focus of attention on baseball batting performance in players of differing
skill levels. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 29(1), 60.
Freudenheim, A. M., Wulf, G., Madureira, F., Pasetto, S. C.,
& Corrêa, U. C. (2010). Original Research: An External Focus of Attention
Results in Greater Swimming Speed. International
Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 5(4),
533-542.
Ille, A., Selin, I., Do, M. C., & Thon, B. (2013).
Attentional focus effects on sprint start performance as a function of skill
level.
Lohse, K. R., Sherwood, D. E., & Healy, A. F. (2010). How
changing the focus of attention affects performance, kinematics, and
electromyography in dart throwing. Human Movement Science, 29(4), 542-555.
Lohse, K. R., & Sherwood, D. E. (2012). Thinking about
muscles: The neuromuscular effects of attentional focus on accuracy and
fatigue. Acta psychologica, 140(3), 236-245.
Manojlović, V., & Erčulj, F. (2013). Impact of the focus
of attention on vertical jump performance of junior basketball players. Fizička kultura, 67(1), 61-67.
Schücker, L., Hagemann, N., Strauss, B., & Völker, K.
(2009). The effect of attentional focus on running economy. Journal of sports sciences, 27(12), 1241-1248.
Shea, C. H., & Wulf, G. (1999). Enhancing motor learning
through external-focus instructions and feedback. Human Movement Science, 18(4), 553-571.
Vance, J., Wulf, G., Töllner, T., McNevin, N., & Mercer,
J. (2004). EMG activity as a function of the performer's focus of attention. Journal of Motor Behavior,36(4), 450-459.
Wulf, G., Lauterbach, B., & Toole, T. (1999). The
learning advantages of an external focus of attention in golf. Research Quarterly for Exercise and
Sport,70(2), 120-126.
Wulf, G., Dufek, J. S., Lozano, L., & Pettigrew, C.
(2010). Increased jump height and reduced EMG activity with an external focus. Human movement science, 29(3), 440-448.
Zachry, T., Wulf, G., Mercer, J., &
Bezodis, N. (2005). Increased movement accuracy and reduced EMG activity as the
result of adopting an external focus of attention. Brain Research Bulletin, 67(4), 304-309.
Zarghami, M., Saemi, E., & Fathi, I. (2012). External
focus of attention enhances discus throwing performance. Kinesiology, 44(1), 47-51.
Zentgraf, K., & Munzert, J. (2009). Effects
of attentional-focus instructions on movement kinematics. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(5), 520-525.
