Imagery Perspective Measurement and Open and Closed Sports Skills
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Internal and External Imagery Perspective Measurement and Use in Imagining Open
and Closed Sports Skills: An Exploratory Study
Michael Spittle and Tony Morris
1. School of Human Movement and Sport Sciences
University of Ballarat
Victoria, Australia
2. School of Human Movement, Recreation and Performance and Centre for Ageing,
Rehabilitation, Exercise and Sport
Victoria University of Technology
Victoria, Australia
Address correspondence to Dr Michael Spittle, School of Human Movement and
Sport Sciences, University of Ballarat, PO Box 663, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
3353, or email (m.spittle@ballarat.edu.au). 20
Imagery Perspective Measurement and Open and Closed Sports Skills
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Summary. - This study explored the measurement and use of internal and
external imagery perspectives during imagery of open and closed sports skills.
Participants (n=41; male = 23; female = 18), ages 14 to 28 (M = 19.4 years; SD =
3.12), who were recruited from undergraduate classes in human movement and
physical education, and local sporting teams, completed the Imagery Use
Questionnaire (IUQ; Hall, Rodgers, & Barr, 1990) and then imagined performing
eight common sports skills, four open skills and four closed skills, in a random order.
Participants provided concurrent verbalisation (CV) during their imagery.
Immediately after imagining each skill, participants completed a rating scale (RS)
and retrospective verbalisation (RV) of imagery perspective use. Results indicated
that the IUQ gave a general imagery perspective preference, but was not a strong
predictor of imagery used on specific occasions. The CV, RS, and RV were
equivalent measures of imagery perspective used to imagine performing particular
skills. Participants experienced more internal imagery than external imagery while
imagining the eight sports skills, but there was no significant difference between
perspective use on the open and closed skills.
Imagery Perspective Measurement and Open and Closed Sports Skills
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Imagery is a process where an individual recalls or creates sensory
experiences in the absence of external stimuli usually associated with these
experiences (Murphy, 1994). Research has shown that imagery is an effective
performance enhancement tool and is one of the psychological skills that sports
psychologists and athletes use most (Murphy & Martin, 2002; Morris, Spittle, &
Perry, 2004; Morris, Spittle, & Watt, 2005). One variable that may affect the
effective use of imagery is the imagery perspective the individual adopts (Morris, et
al., 2005). Mahoney and Avener (1977) defined perspective in terms of whether the
image is internal or external. They proposed that external imagery occurs when the
person views themselves from the perspective of an external observer, much like
watching oneself on TV. Internal imagery involves the person imagining being inside
their body and experiencing those sensations that might occur while performing in
the real situation. If imagery perspective affects the effective use of imagery, then
investigating the use of imagery perspectives is imperative to understanding how to
use imagery effectively (Morris, et al., 2005). To examine imagery perspective, it is
important that imagery perspective use be measured appropriately. This study
examined the crucial issues of measurement of imagery perspective preferences and
imagery perspective use. In addition, because the type of skill or task being imagined
might affect imagery use, the influence of task type on imagery use was considered.
Measurement of Imagery Perspective Use
The development of appropriate measures of imagery perspective has been
limited, consequently the measurement of imagery perspective use has been
problematic, with many studies simply assigning participants to perspective training
groups and assuming that they used the assigned perspective, or assigning
participants to groups based on self-reported preferences.
Imagery Perspective Measurement and Open and Closed Sports Skills
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
There have been two main types of measure of imagery perspective use
(Morris, et al., 2005). First, preference or trait measures ask a person to make an
overall or global assessment of their usual perspective use, with the person not
oriented towards a specific previous event. Trait measures use words like “usually”,
“generally”, or “typically”, because they are not focusing on specific events requiring
temporal orientation or limitation, e.g., the Imagery Use Questionnaire (IUQ; Hall,
Rodgers, & Barr, 1990). Second, imagery perspective use has been assessed by
presenting a scene to imagine and, following imagery, asking people to rate their
imagery of that scene on a scale, e.g., the Movement Imagery Questionnaire (MIQ;
Hall, & Pongrac, 1983) and the Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire
(VMIQ; Isaac, Marks, & Russell, 1986). These reports are retrospective in the sense
that they ask people to recall a specific event, which requires a temporal orientation.
Retrospective reports are subject to memory lapses as well as spontaneous
reconstruction of events or processes based on known outcomes (Anderson, 1981;
Brewer, Van Raalte, Linder, & Van Raalte, 1991). Thus, a concurrent technique may
provide a viable option for measuring imagery perspective use during imagery by
providing an account of cognitive processing at the time it occurs, rather than
retrospectively (Morris, et al., 2005). Concurrent Verbalisation (CV) is a process
where an individual verbalises their cognitive processes while performing the task. It
is “thinking aloud” (Ericsson & Simon, 1980). CV has been used successfully in the
study of mental processes, such as problem-solving (e.g., Newell & Simon, 1972),
visual and verbal coding (e.g., Schuck & Leahy, 1966), cue-probability learning
(e.g., Brehmer, 1974), concept learning (e.g., Bower & King, 1967), mental
multiplication (e.g., Dansereau & Gregg, 1966), performance on intelligence tests
(e.g., Merz, 1969), concentration during running (Schomer, 1986), and expertise in
Imagery Perspective Measurement and Open and Closed Sports Skills
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
chess (DeGroot, 1965). Studies on imaginal activity in non sport situations have used
the CV technique (e.g., Bertini, Lewis, & Witkin, 1969; Kazdin, 1975, 1976, 1979;
Klinger, 1978; Klos & Singer, 1981; Petre & Blackwell, 1999). In a study of non
sport motor skills, Annett (1986) investigated imagery of everyday skills, such as
knot tying and forward rolls, with CV. Verbalisation can also be used retrospectively
to understand cognitive processes. Studies that have used a retrospective
verbalisation (RV) protocol include studies on concept learning (Hendrix, 1947;
Phelan, 1965), learned generalisations (Sowder, 1974), concept formation
(Rommetveit, 1960, 1965; Rommetveit & Kvale, 1965a, 1965b), and expert-novice
differences in tennis (McPherson, 2000). Despite their potential to provide rich
information on the content of imagery, neither CV nor RV has been used to explore
imagery perspective use.
Imagery Perspective Use
Most research on imagery perspectives has focused on the influence of
perspective on an outcome variable, such as performance, rather than focusing on
which perspective participants use. Questionnaire studies provide some insight into
imagery perspective use. In the questionnaire research on imagery perspectives,
researchers have typically employed a “trait” approach (Morris, et al., 2005). The
findings have been mixed, with some studies finding that elite or more successful
performers used more internal imagery than less elite/successful athletes (e.g.,
Mahoney & Avener, 1977; Doyle & Landers, 1980; Carpinter & Cratty, 1983; Barr
& Hall, 1992), some studies finding no difference between these categories of
performer (e.g., Highlen & Bennett, 1979; Meyers, Cooke, Cullen, & Liles, 1979;
Rotella, Gansneder, Ojala, & Billing, 1980; Hall, et al., 1990), or that elite athletes
used more external imagery (e.g., Ungerleider & Golding, 1991). Studies that have
