Comparison Ability of Movement Imagery perspectives in Elite, Sub-Elite and non Elite Athletes

Transcription

1 International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences 2014 Available online at ISSN X / Vol, 8 (6): Science Explorer Publications Comparison Ability of Movement Imagery perspectives in Elite, Sub-Elite and non Elite Athletes Seyed Ehsan Nezam 1, Hamzeh IsaZadeh 2, Ali Hojjati 3, Zahra Bozorg Zadeh 4 1. Ph.d. Student of Motor Behavior in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad 2. MS.c. Sport Management in Tehran University 3. MS.c. Sport Psychology in Tehran University 4. MS.c. Sport Management in Islamic Azad University Corresponding author Alihojjati@ut.ac.ir ABSTRACT: Within contemporary sport psychology there is a need to highlight those psychological skill that distinguish performers at the height of their sport from the subsequent levels. The present study compares movement Imagery perspectives in Elite, Sub-Elite and non Elite Athletes. The researchers embarked on a descriptive survey design and employed the questionnaire method during the data collection process. In Study, 256 (men 145 & women 111) at those three levels selected by simple sampling method completed the movement Imagery questionnaire (MIQ-3; Williams & et al., 2012). Validity and reliability of this questionnaire assessed in a pilot study that was confirmed (with alpha cronbach in three sub-scales). After collecting data, descriptive and inferential statistics methods were used. The Multiple one way ANOVA and LSD post-hoc tests revealed that there are significant difrences between in three levels of athletes in internal visual imagery and kinesthetic imagery. Scores were significantly higher in elite than the sub-elite and non-elite players. Also sub-elite showed higher score tah the non elite. Vice versa, there are not significant diffrences between three level athletes in external visual imagery. According to these result it looks athletes in highest level most use of internal visual imagery and kinesthetic imagery. Keywords: external visual imagery, internal visual imagery, kinesthetic imagery. INTRODUCTION Imagery is a cognitive process that have important role in the execution of movements or function. It is frequently employed to assist motor skill learning, or relearning, as well as to better motor performance in clinical, dance, and sport context (Cumming & Williams, 2012). In the other hand, Imagery is a popular and well-established strategy used to improve performance (Cumming & Ramsey, 2009).Its effect, however, is influenced by an individual s capacity to build and control clear images (Martin, Moritz, & Hall, 1999). The effectiveness of an imagery intervention increases for those reporting a higher ability to image (Hall, Buckolz&,Fishburne, 1992). For example, Robin et al. (2007) demonstrated that individuals with higher imagery ability experienced greater improvement in the accuracy of their tennis serve return compared with poorer imagers. In addition, Martin et al. (1999) hypothesized imagery ability would moderate the relationship between imagery use and its intended outcome a proposal that has received support (Cumming, 2008). Mental imagery is often a primary intervention used by psychologists and coaches to enhance athletic performance. In fact, Murphy, Jowdy, and Durtschi (1989) reported that 90 percent of athletes, 94 percent of coaches, and 100 percent of sport psychologists in the United States identified mental imagery techniques as a standard fixture in their training regimens. One therefore would expect, given the usage of such a technique, that there would be a substantial amount of literature dedicated to the theory, implementation, and effect of imagery on athletic performance. Imagery has been shown to increase concentration, aid motivation, alter arousal levels (Hecker & Kaczor, 1988), and enhance the acquisition of a new skill (Driskell, Copper, & Moran, 1994). Imagery can be used to create new experiences by putting together pieces of any internal picture in various ways (Vealey & Greenleaf, 2006). The goal of mental imagery is to produce the athletic experience so accurately that athletes feel as if they are actually performing the sport (Hale, 1998; Holmes & Collins, 2001). Resarchers

2 have found that athletes describe basically four type s imagery (visual, kinesthetic, auditory, and olfactory) and that they use visual and kinesthetic imagery most often, and to same extent (winberg & Gould, 2011). Movement imagery refers to the visual and kinesthetic properties of movements that are rehearsed mentally in the absence of overt physical movement (Hall, 2001). The emphases of movement imagery is commonly on visual and kinesthetic imagery, which are often practiced simultaneously (Cumming & Ste -Marie, 2001).visual imagery is included external visual imagery and internal visual imagery, both visual imagery perspectives are also proposed to serve unique benefits. An external visual imagery perspective is valuable when performing tasks such as the learning of movements, and when forms or body coordination is important, as the imager is presented with a view of how the movement or action should be performed, such as limb positions (White & Hardy, 1995). Internal visual imagery is thought to be beneficial for open skills when timing is important. From this internal position, the individual is able to rehearse spatial locations and at what time a movement should be initiated (White & Hardy, 1995). Depending on the imagery content and the intended outcome, it has been suggested that a particular perspective may be most beneficial. Some athletes prefer to image from one perspective more than another, whereas others prefer switching between the two (e.g., Cumming & Ste -Marie, 2001) and altering their images to take advantage of different viewing angles (Callow & Roberts, 2010). in the other hand, Kinesthetic imagery is imagery that describes movement, Kinaesthetic imagery refers to the ability to imagine the feeling of the body as it moves. This kind of imagery, within sport psychology research, is still loosely defined as the sense of the movement (Kimet al., 1998). A somewhat different difference between kinesthetic and visual imagery relates movement imagery to kinesthetic imagery of one's own movements, whilst visual imagery is related with spatial peculiarities of a movement in the surroundings. Thus, visual imagery mostly utilize to imagery of moving objects or to movement of other person in the imagined environment, albeit imaging one's own movement is also conceivable (callow& hardy, 2004). Research on the effect of imagery on performance has found that use of kinaesthetic imagery may positively impact on athletic learning (Smyth & Waller, 1998) and performance (Fery & Morizot, 2000). Further, kinaesthetic imagery is considered particularly important when form of movement is the desired performance outcome (Fery, 2003). According to researchers vividness (Poltrock & Agnoli, 1986), main tenance (Denis, 1991), and control (Kosslyn) are aspects used to measure imagery ability. Thus, the aim of this Study was to examine is there are any differences between the Vividness and Ability of Movement Imagery in Elite, subelite and non Elite Athletes. METHOD Participants This study is an application research and is a descriptive comporison method, that has been done as a field Research. The participants in this study were 256 athletes (men 145 & women 111) in six collegiate sports (basketball, footsal, soccer, badminton, hanball and volleyball). They ranged in age from 18 to 32 years (mean = 25, 3 s = 1.3). Respondents provided data as part of the investigation; 81 elite athletes, 85 were sub-elite and 90 non-elite athletes therefore, the sample represented competitive athletes performance at three level. Elite athletes possessed a professional contract at one of professional leage. Players that participate at a higher level i.e., International, may have been included in this category. They had been playing at professional level for an average of 4.20 years (s = 2.14), and had been playing their sport in general for years (s = 2.6). Sub-elite athlets played within one of university teams they had been playing at university level for an average of 1.6 years (s =1.31), and had been playing their sport in general for 3.6 years (s = 1.45). Non-elite performers had experiences of competetive just within one of club teams for an average of 0.7 years (s =0.56), and had been playing their sport in general for 1.4 years. Measures Demographic information The background information sheet that was used in this study included questions relating to the participants age, sex, sport, level and experience playing sport at university and experienc eplaying sport in general. Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) The MIQ-3 is composed of three subscales assessing external visual imagery and internal visual imagery, as well as kinesthetic imagery. The same four movements are physically performed and imaged three times, 713

3 creating a 12-item questionnaire. The rating scales from the MIQ-R were retained such that participants responses varied from 1 (very hard to see or feel) to 7 (very easy to see or feel), with a higher average score for a subscale representing a greater ease of imaging. Participants were provided with definitions of external visual imagery, internal visual imagery, and kinesthetic imagery before they completed the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were calculated for the three performance categories. Tests of normality (using Klomogrof Smirnof) were then conducted for each measures sub-scale, before internal consistency was checked using Chronbach Alpha. The raw data obtained from research analyzed using version 20 of SPSS software. To illative resolution and analyze of data, All data was visually screened to check for outliers. Multiple one-way ANOVA s were conducted to examine differences between visual internal imagery, visual external imagery and kinetic imagery as a function of level of play. RESULT Prior to statistical analysis the internal consistency of all sub-scales was measured. All sub-scales were internally consistent in that Chronbach Alpha s exceeded One-way ANOVA s are robust in nature (Pallant, 2007), the decision was made to employ thirteen one-way ANOVA s (one for each sub -scale used within the present study) followed by a LSD correction. According to the results of Table 1 were calculated as f= 6/880 is less than the critical f value, therefore be concluded there are a significant difference between the diffrent type of imagery in three level of athletes. Kinesthetic imagery Internal visual imagery External visual ima gery Table 1. Results of One Way ANOVA between Elit, Sub Elit and Non Elit Athletes ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Given the significant difference between the the diffrent type of imagery in three level of athletes LSD posthoc tests was used to determine disputed. LSD Dependent Variable Table 2. Result of LSD post-hoc between groups Multiple Comparisons (I) level (J) level Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Kinesthetic imagery elite sub non * sub elite non * non elite * sub * Internal visual imagery elite sub * non * sub elite * non non elite * sub External visual imagery elite sub non sub elite non non elite sub *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. 714

4 DISCUSSION This study compares movement imagery component in Elit, Sub Elit and Non Elit Athletes. To this end, we used one-way ANOVA and LSD post-hoc tests. It has been shown that there are significant diffrences between dimention of movement imagery in three levels of athletes. Consistent with previous research examining imagery use in athletes (Mahoney & Avener, 1977; Orlick & Partington, 1988), the present study has identified imagery skill may be associated with superior/inferior sports performance. Results showed significant differences among the three level athletes in internal visual imagery and kinesthetic imagery, Scores were significantly higher in elite than the sub-elite and non-elite players. Also sub-elite showed higher score tah the non elite. Vice versa, there are not significant diffrences between three level athletes in external visual imagery. Some resarchers believed elite athletes used internal visual imagery than the external visual imagery. The internal perspective is believed to have the potential to incorporate kinesthetic imagery (the feel of the movement) while the external perspective may be insufficient to produce such sensations (Rodgers, Hall & Barr, 1990). As observed in the current study, internal and kinesthetic perspectives are different with external perspective. In the early stages of learning, external perspective may be more beneficial as it allows learner to examine the motor skills involved in the skill from outside of their body giving the most inclusive view of their limbs and relevant visual cues. For tasks that rely on kinesthetic awareness, internal imagery has often been advocated and implemented as opposed to external imagery is because the internal perspective is presumed to have a stronger relationship to kinesthetic sensations (Jowdy et al., 1989). In addition, some experimental studies (Epstein, 1980) found no differences between imagery landscapes and their effects on performance. Three possible statements have been provided for these contradictory results: (a) that particular visual imagery perspectives generate greater performance profit for certain motor tasks than for others (Highlen and Bennett, 1979), (b) that previous conception of internal imagery (such as that used by Epstein and Mahoney and Avener) have bewildered internal visual imagery with kinesthetic imagery (Hardy an d Callow, 1999), and (c) that it has been incorre ctly supposed that kinesthetic imagery can only be experienced with an internal perspective or is easier to use with an internal perspective (Taktek, 2012). Specific aspects of motor skill performance have shown to be enhanced by varying types of imagery (Guillot et al., 2009). For example, Hardy and Callow (1999) suggests that external visual imagery may be more beneficial than an internal perspective to enhance the performance of a motor skill task where form and technique are most important. Ungerleider and Golding (1991) found that successful track and field athletes used more external imagery rather than non-successful athletes. Conversely, it is suggested that an internal visual imagery perspective may be most beneficial for open/reactive skills that depend heavily on perception (White & Hardy, 1995). Given, in this study athletes used open/reactive skills like as basketball, footsal, soccer, badminton, hanball and volleyball it can be said this study is agree with past research. However, all imagery research is not consistently in agreement with these suggestions, and more extensive research is needed to verify the prevalence of specific imagery types as it relates to the characteristics of movement, and to gain a more in-depth understanding or the inconsistencies in the research (Guillot & Collet, 2008). Consequently, it is not possible to establish a guideline for a preferential imagery type associated with the specific form and technique of a motor skill. In line with past research, our data supports the movement Imagery perspectives (Kinesthetic imagery, internal visual imagery) that non elite athletes have more difficulty with sub elite and elite athletes. According to these result it looks athletes in highest level most use of internal visual imagery and kinesthetic imagery. REFERENCES Callow N, Hardy L The relationship between the use of kinaesthetic imagery and different visual imagery perspectives. J Sports Sci. 2004; 22: Callow N, Roberts R Imagery research: An investigation of three issues. Psy-chology of Sport and Exercise, 11, doi: /j.psychsport Cumming J, Williams SE Imagery: The role of imagery in performance. In S. Murphy (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Sport and Performance Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Cumming J, Ramsey R Sport imagery interventions. In S. Mellalieu & S. Hanton (Eds.), Advances in applied sport psychology: A review (pp. 5 36). London: Routledge. Cumming J Investigating the relationship between exercise imagery, leisure time exercise behavior, and self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 20, Cumming JL, Ste-Marie DM The cognitive and motivational effects of imagery training: A matter of perspective. The Sport Psychologist, 15, Retrieved from. Driskell JE, Coppe C, Moran A Does mental practice enhance performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, Fery YA Differentiating visual and kinesthetic imagery in mental practice. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57,

5 Fery YA, Morizot P Kinesthetic and visual image in modeling closed motor skills: The example of the tennis serve. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 90, Guillot A, Nadrowska E, Collet C Using motor imagery to learn tactical movements in basketball. Journal of Sport Behavior, 32(2), Guillot A, Collet C Construction of the motor imagery integrative model in sport: A review and theoretical investigations of motor imagery use. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1(1), Hall CR, Buckolz E, Fishburne G Imagery and the acquisition of motor skills. Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences, 17, Hall C, Mack D, Paivio A, Hausenblas H Imagery use by athletes: Development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 29, Holmes P, Collins D The PETTLEP approach to motor imagery. A functional equivalence model for sport psychologists. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, Hall CR Imagery in sport and exercise. In R.N. Singer, H.A. Hausenblas, & C.M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (2 nd ed.) (pp ). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hecker JE, Kaczor LM Application of imagery theory to sport psychology: Some preliminary findings. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, Kim J, Singer RN, Tennant LK Visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic imagery on motor learning.journal of Human Movement Studies, 5, Martin KA, Moritz SE, Hall C Imagery use in sport: A literature review and applied model. The Sport Psychologist, 13, Martin KA, Moritz SE, Hall C Imagery use in sport: A literature review and applied model. The Sport Psychologist, 13, Murphy SM, Jowdy DP, Durtschi SK Report on the United States Olympic Committee survey on imagery use in sport: Unpublished research report, U. S. Olympic Committee, Colorado. Springs, CO Martin KA, Moritz SE, Hall C Imagery use in sport: A literature review and applied model. The Sport Psychologist, 13, Retrieved from Robin N, Dominique L, Toussaint L, Blandin Y, Guillot A, Le Her M Effect of motor imagery training on service return accuracy in tennis: The role of imagery ability. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2, Smyth MM, Waller A Movement imagery in rock climbing: Patterns of interference from visual, spatial and kinaesthetic secondary tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, Ungerleider S, G olding JM Mental practiceamong Olympic athletes. Percept.Motor Skills72, doi: /pms Vealey R, Greenleaf C Seeing believes: Understanding and using imagery in sport. In J. M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (5 th ed., pp ). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing. White A, Hardy L Use of different imagery perspectives on the learning and performance of different motor skills. British Journal of Psychology, 86, White A, Hardy L Use of different imagery perspectives on the learning and performance of different motor skills. The British Journal of Psychology, 86, PubMed doi: /j tb02554.x Weinberg RS, Gould G "Imagery". In: Weinberg, Robert S.: Foundations of sport and exercise psychology, 2nd ed, Human kinetics, United States of America, PP: