Empirical findings consistently suggest that an external focus of attention leads to superior performance when compared to an internal focus by encouraging more automatic processing. However, for certain skills (e.g., gymnastics routines) it can be challenging to identify a meaningful external focus cue. A related line of research suggests that focusing on the general feeling of a movement (i.e., holistic focus) may also be useful in avoiding conscious control of movements. The purpose of this study was to determine how an internal focus (INT), external focus (EXT), and holistic focus (HOL) impact the performance of a standing long jump. Participants (N = 27) completed two baseline jumps followed by two jumps in each focus condition. Jump distance was analyzed in a 6 (Order) × 4 (Focus) mixed ANOVA. Results indicated a significant main effect of focus (p < .001), with EXT and HOL resulting in farther jumps than INT and baseline conditions (p-values < .05). EXT and HOL did not differ significantly from each other, and INT did not differ significantly from baseline. The findings suggest that a holistic focus can be another effective means of avoiding conscious control of movement when an external focus is not practical or desired.

The study tested whether age, sex, or task complexity moderate the effect of attentional focus on motor learning. Children (24 boys, 24 girls) and adults (24 men, 24 women) were assigned to an internal or external attentional focus, and were timed while riding either a Double Pedalo with handles (simple task) or without handles (complex task) over a distance of 7 meters. A Double Pedalo is a four-wheeled device that involves standing on two connected platforms, and alternately pushing them forward to make it move. Participants completed 20 acquisition trials, followed by a 24-hour retention test. For the simpler task, no time differences due to attentional focus emerged. With the complex task, an external focus resulted in faster times in retention than an internal focus, but only for males. These findings suggest that attentional focus affects children and adults similarly, but task complexity and sex moderate these effects.

Attentional focus research suggests an external focus leads to improved motor performance compared to an internal focus (Wulf in Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 6:77-104, 2013), but skilled athletes often report using an internal focus (Fairbrother et al., Front Psychol 7:1028, 2016) and sometimes shifting between different foci in the preparation and execution phases of performance (Bernier et al. in J Appl Sport Psychol 23:326-341, 2011; Bernier et al. in Sport Psychol 30:256-266, 2016). To date, focus shifts have been unexplored in experimental research, thus the purpose of this study was to determine the effect of shifting focus between the preparation and execution phases of a standing long jump. Participants (N = 29) completed two jumps in a control condition (CON), followed by two jumps in four experimental conditions presented in a counterbalanced order. Conditions included using an external focus (EF) and internal focus (IF) in both preparation and execution of the skill, as well as shifting from an internal focus in preparation to an external focus in execution (ITE), and an external focus in preparation to an internal focus in execution (ETI). Jump distance was analyzed with a repeated measures ANOVA. The main effect of condition was significant, p < .001, with EF producing longer jumps than all other conditions (p's < 0.05). ITE also generated farther jumps than IF and CON (p's < 0.05). The superiority of the EF and ITE conditions suggests that the focus employed in execution has the strongest impact on performance. Additionally, if an internal focus must be used in preparation, the performance decrement can be ameliorated by shifting to an external focus during execution.

No abstract

Attentional focus research consistently suggests that the use of an external focus of attention improves motor learning and performance relative to an internal focus. It appears, however, that external focus cues are not frequently adopted in applied sport settings. One issue that may contribute to this disparity relates to variability in how cues are employed in research and practice. Experimental research tends to use a single-cue approach, while in sports, athletes often sample several cues within the same practice. A limitation of the single-cue approach is that attentional focus effects could be due either to focus direction (internal vs. external) or to the relative effectiveness of a particular cue (e.g. an effective externally focused cue vs. an ineffective internally focused cue). This study tested whether external focus benefits generalize to situations in which participants use multiple cues of the same type throughout acquisition. Volunteers ( N = 22) learned a dart throwing task while using three internally or externally focused cues. Results indicated an external focus led to lower error scores during acquisition and a delayed retention test ( p’s < .05). These results demonstrate that the external focus benefit generalizes to situations where a performer uses multiple cues.