July 2015
·
366 Reads
This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.
July 2015
·
366 Reads
July 1999
·
3,338 Reads
·
168 Citations
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
This study examined whether the learning advantages of an external focus of attention relative to an internal focus, as demonstrated by Wulf, Höss, and Prinz (1998), would also be found for a sport skill under field-like conditions. Participants (9 women, 13 men; age range: 21-29 years) without experience in golf were required to practice pitch shots. The practice phase consisted of 80 practice trials. One group was instructed to focus on the arm swing (internal focus), whereas another group was instructed to focus on the club swing (external focus). One day after practice, a retention test of 30 trials without instructions was performed. The external-focus condition was more effective for performance during both practice and retention.
February 1999
·
775 Reads
·
428 Citations
This study examined whether the learning advantages of an external focus of attention relative to an internal focus, as demonstrated by Wulf, Hööß, and Prinz (1998), would also be found for a sport skill under field-like conditions. Participants (9 women, 13 men; age range: 21–29 years) without experience in golf were required to practice pitch shots. The practice phase consisted of 80 practice trials. One group was instructed to focus on the arm swing (internal focus), whereas another group was instructed to focus on the club swing (external focus). One day after practice, a retention test of 30 trials without instructions was performed. The external-focus condition was more effective for performance during both practice and retention.
January 1998
·
68 Reads
·
5 Citations
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
... In Task 2, only the first motion was identified as slightly challenging. Prior research on attention capacity has indicated that as conditions become more complex, greater attention is required, thereby making it more challenging to automate motor control [40][41][42][43]. In other words, as the difficulty of the motions increased, the success rate of the task decreased and the difficulty level increased. ...
January 1998
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
... Initial research conducted by Wulf et al. (1998Wulf et al. ( , 1999Wulf et al. ( , 2000 on attentional focus did not include any manipulation check. Early research on the topic identified a lack of adherence to instructions by some participants (Maxwell & Masters, 2002), while Mullen (2007) identified the absence of manipulation checks as a "fundamental problem with the attentional focus research" (p. ...
February 1999
... Motor performance and EMG activity. Manipulation check which evaluated how extent the participants concentrated on the instructed target showed no significant difference between the EF and IF conditions (EF, 7.9 [6][7][8][9][10]; IF, 7.6 [5][6][7][8][9]). The subjective ratings of performance were 2.6 (range [1][2][3][4][5] for 'flight trajectory of the dart' in the EF condition, and 3.9 (range 2-6) for 'elbow angle at release' in the IF condition (Fig. 1A). ...
July 1999
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport