ebooks logo journals logo reference works logo abstract databases logo
bullet  SIGN IN Register | Why Register? | Got a Voucher? alerts   marked lists   shopping cart 

informaworld

HOME   |   SEARCH   |   BROWSE
    Issues List       Latest Issue       Forthcoming Articles       Volume 24 Issue 1       Subscribe       Article       References       Cited By       Related articles      
firstfirst   < prevprev   Table of contentstoc   next >next   last >>last
Publisher Logo Publication Cover
Search within this journal

Benefits of an external focus of attention: Common coding or conscious processing? 

Authors: J. M. Poolton a;  J. P. Maxwell a;  R. S. W. Masters a; M. Raab b
Affiliations:   a Institute of Human Performance, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
b Institute for Movement Sciences and Sport, University of Flensburg, Flensburg, Germany
DOI: 10.1080/02640410500130854
Publication Frequency: 14 issues per year
Published in: journal Journal of Sports Sciences, Volume 24, Issue 1 January 2006 , pages 89 - 99
Formats available: HTML (English) : PDF (English)
Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions


Abstract

We conducted two experiments to assess the effect attentional focus has on learning a complex motor skill and subsequent performance under secondary task loading. Participants in Experiment 1 learnt a golf putting task (300 practice trials) with a single instruction to either focus on their hands (internal focus) or the movement of the putter (external focus). No group differences were evident during learning or retention. Differences between the groups were only apparent under secondary task load; the external group's performance remained robust, while the internal group suffered a drop in performance. Verbal protocols demonstrated that the internal group accumulated significantly more internal knowledge and more task-relevant knowledge in general than the external group. Experiment 2 was designed to establish whether greater internal focus knowledge or greater explicit rule build up in general was responsible for performance breakdown. Two groups were presented with a set of six internal or external rules. Again, no performance differences were found during learning or retention. During the secondary task, both groups experienced performance deterioration. It was concluded that accumulation of explicit rules to guide performance was responsible for the internal group's breakdown in performance under secondary task loading and may be responsible for some of the performance differences reported previously.
Keywords: Explicit; implicit; knowledge; golf putting; motor learning
view references (27) : view citations
Bookmark with:
  • CiteULike
  • Del.icio.us
  • BibSonomy
  • Connotea
  • More bookmarks
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Accessibility | RSS
FAQs in: English . Français . Español . 中文(简体和繁體)
© 2010 Informa plc