Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners

Stoate, Isabelle; Wulf, Gabriele; Lewthwaite, Rebecca

doi:10.1080/02640414.2012.671533

Cited by 63 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A study by Stoate et al [65] investigated whether feedback pertaining to the efficiency of performance during a running bout would influence movement efficiency. Lower oxygen uptake, more marked changes in perceptions of performance and greater positive affect were shown in the group that received positive fabricated feedback compared to a control group with no feedback.…”

Section: Qualitative Performance Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physiological and Psychological Effects of Deception on Pacing Strategy and Performance: A Review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of an optimal pacing strategy during exercise is to enhance performance whilst ensuring physiological limits are not surpassed, which has been shown to result in a metabolic reserve at the end of the exercise. There has been debate surrounding the theoretical models that have been proposed to explain how pace is regulated, with more recent research investigating a central control of exercise regulation. Deception has recently emerged as a common, practical approach to manipulate key variables during exercise. There are a number of ways in which deception interventions have been designed, each intending to gain particular insights into pacing behaviour and performance. Deception methodologies can be conceptualised according to a number of dimensions such as deception timing (prior to or during exercise); presentation frequency (blind, discontinuous or continuous); and type of deception (performance, biofeedback or environmental feedback). However research evidence on the effects of deception has been perplexing and the use of complex designs and varied methodologies makes it difficult to draw any definitive conclusions about how pacing strategy and performance are affected by deception.This review examines existing research in the area of deception and pacing strategies, and provides a critical appraisal of the different methodological approaches used to date. It is hoped that this critical analysis will inform the direction and methodology of future investigations in this area by addressing the mechanisms through which deception impacts upon performance and by elucidating the potential application of deception techniques in training and competitive settings.

show abstract

Section: Qualitative Performance Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physiological and Psychological Effects of Deception on Pacing Strategy and Performance: A Review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A study by Hutchinson, Sherman, Martinovic, and Tenenbaum (2008) showed greater tolerance for sustained effort in a continuous force production task, increased self-efficacy, and lower perceived exertion as a function of positive normative feedback compared with both negative feedback and control conditions. 1 Positive normative feedback has been found to increase perceived competence (Ávila et al, 2012), reduce concerns and nervousness about performance and ability , Experiment 1), increase satisfaction with performance and motivation to learn (Wulf, Lewthwaite, & Hooyman, 2013), and increase positive affect (Stoate et al, 2012). In contrast, negative feedback (and perhaps control) conditions seem to trigger thoughts about the self and resulting self-regulatory activities that hamper learning of the primary task.…”

Section: Social-comparative Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perceptions of self-efficacy are related to affective self-reactions and related self-regulatory activity Jourden, Bandura, & Banfield, 1991;Themanson, Pontifex, Hillman, & McAuley, 2011). Task enjoyment (Hutchinson et al, 2008) and positive affect as assessed by the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) also have been related to conditions that enhance expectancies (Stoate et al, 2012). However, it is not known whether these cognitive and affective impacts are co-effects or integral aspects of a confident state of mind.…”

Section: Mechanisms For Enhanced Expectancy Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, in studies concerned with performance rather than learning, increases in movement efficiency resulting from positive social-comparative feedback were observed. Stoate, Wulf, and Lewthwaite (2012) found that favorable feedback enhanced running efficiency in experienced runners, in addition to reducing perceptions of effort. A study by Hutchinson, Sherman, Martinovic, and Tenenbaum (2008) showed greater tolerance for sustained effort in a continuous force production task, increased self-efficacy, and lower perceived exertion as a function of positive normative feedback compared with both negative feedback and control conditions.…”

Section: Social-comparative Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective motor performance is important for surviving and thriving, and skilled movement is critical in many activities. Much theorizing over the past few decades has focused on how certain practice conditions affect the processing of task-related information to affect learning. Yet, existing theoretical perspectives do not accommodate significant recent lines of evidence demonstrating motivational and attentional effects on performance and learning. These include research on (a) conditions that enhance expectancies for future performance, (b) variables that influence learners' autonomy, and (c) an external focus of attention on the intended movement effect. We propose the OPTIMAL (Optimizing Performance through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning) theory of motor learning. We suggest that motivational and attentional factors contribute to performance and learning by strengthening the coupling of goals to actions. We provide explanations for the performance and learning advantages of these variables on psychological and neuroscientific grounds. We describe a plausible mechanism for expectancy effects rooted in responses of dopamine to the anticipation of positive experience and temporally associated with skill practice. Learner autonomy acts perhaps largely through an enhanced expectancy pathway. Furthermore, we consider the influence of an external focus for the establishment of efficient functional connections across brain networks that subserve skilled movement. We speculate that enhanced expectancies and an external focus propel performers' cognitive and motor systems in productive "forward" directions and prevent "backsliding" into self-and non-task focused states. Expected success presumably breeds further success and helps consolidate memories. We discuss practical implications and future research directions.Keywords Motivation . Attentional focus . Self-efficacy . Positive affect . Dopamine . Motor performance Skilled movement is fundamental to surviving and thriving in the world and the basis as well for many of the highest human endeavors and cultural achievements, from sport to art to music. How people learn and relearn movement skills has been addressed from a number of disparate scientific perspectives and levels of analysis, including behavioral, social cognitive, neurophysiological, and neurocomputational. In part, differences in assumptions, scientific terminology and philosophy, as well as methodological approaches have made scholarly rapprochement challenging, but we see the end goal of optimizing motor learning as important. We suggest that it may be valuable to bring recent insights from various approaches together to identify a coherent way forward that can result in optimized learning from humans' earliest encounters with new motor skills to the lifelong development of motoric expertise.It is typically considered time to look afresh at dominant theories in a field when the accumulating evidence suggests that old frameworks cannot account for substantial new insights an...

show abstract

“…1,2 The intent is to explore how athletic performance may be optimised through the access of reserve capacities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deception has no acute or residual effect on cycling time trial performance but negatively effects perceptual responses

Jones

Williams

Marchant

et al. 2016

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

word count: 227Tables: 1 Results: Both groups performed faster in PACER than FBL and SUB (p < 0.05), but SUB was not significantly different to FBL. Affect was more negative and Ratings of Perceived Exertion (RPE) were higher in PACER than FBL in the deception group (p < 0.05). Conclusions:The presence of a visual pacer acutely facilitated time trial performance, but deceptive feedback had no additional effect on performance. The deception group did however experience more negative affect and higher RPE in PACER, whereas these responses were absent in the control group. The performance improvement was not sustained in SUB, suggesting no residual performance effects occurred.

show abstract

Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners

Cited by 63 publications

References 44 publications

Physiological and Psychological Effects of Deception on Pacing Strategy and Performance: A Review

Physiological and Psychological Effects of Deception on Pacing Strategy and Performance: A Review

Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning

Deception has no acute or residual effect on cycling time trial performance but negatively effects perceptual responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About