Podium Sports Journal » dr. dave smith

PETTLEP Imagery 5 – A New Frontier in Mental Conditioning

Stephen Walker, PhD — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:37:19 +0000

PETTLEP Imagery Part 5

By Dave Smith, Ph.D.
In collaboration with Stephen Walker, Ph.D. from Podium Sports Journal

The first 3 parts of this series focused on previous research in the use of imagery for improving athletic performance, and the specific factors that contribute to measurable benefits athletes have experienced in the use of imagery applied to strength and conditioning training.

Functional equivalence, as measured by fMRIs, EEGs and PET scans, was determined to be the component factor that established the threshold for effectiveness of methods using imagery to enhance athletic performance.

PETTLEP imagery has been advocated as a method that passes the functional equivalence criteria as athletes employ the physical, environmental, task, timing, learning, emotion, and perspective parameters for using imagery and visualization to assist in improving athletic performance.

Part 3 examined the practical applications of this method as it was employed in studies of weight trainers who were able to demonstrate strength gains through the use of PETTLEP imagery. Part 4 looked at applications in other sports including a study of varsity field hockey players randomly assigned to different imagery groups. Although, ALL FOUR test groups demonstrated gains in a repeated measures design, the sport-specific group and the clothing group showed the greatest gains in athletic performance. The PETTLEP components were most widely distributed amongst these two imagery groups.

What other Research has demonstrated the Effectiveness of PETTLEP Imagery?

In the March 2007 issue of the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, our department at the University of Chester published two research studies that provided interesting applications for the use of PETTLEP imagery (Smith, Wright, Allsopp & Westhead, 2007). These studies not only enabled us to evaluate the effectiveness of PETTLEP imagery, but we were also able to measure some specific components of PETTLEP in the various groups.

Both of these studies examined the effects of PETTLEP-based imagery compared to more traditional imagery interventions. PETTLEP is characterized by the applications of a physical, environmental, task, timing, learning, emotional and perspective components to the imagery process employed in the studies.

Study 2 – Learning a Grade C Gymnastics Skill on the Balance Beam

Our goal was to determine whether the PETTLEP imagery method showed a discernible difference in enhancing athletic performance, when compared to traditional methods of imagery. This study recruited 40 female gymnasts between the ages of 7-14 years (mean age = 10.1, SD = 1.81) from a local gymnastics club. None of the gymnasts had previously attempted the skill used in this study, and none had received previous imagery training. Participants were randomly assigned to the following four groups: physical practice group, PETTLEP group, stimulus imagery group, and control group.

The criterion task for this study included a full turning straight jump on the beam. This skill is classified as C grade in the Official Code for British Gymnastics. C grade skills are the most complex and difficult to learn, and involve more risk than A and B grades. Participants had three attempts at the skill in both pre- and post-tests.

Each attempt was video recorded, and evaluated by a fully qualified national British gymnastics coach, who was blind to the nature of the study. Furthermore, the judge was unaware which videotape for each participant was the pre-test and which was the post-test, so as to avoid any possible bias. The attempts were judged on a scale of 1 to 10 and the average of the three marks for each gymnast was taken as her final mark.

Upon completion of the pre-test, the interventions were introduced to the participants. They were randomly assigned and divided equally among the following:

1. Physical Practice group.
This group was comprised of those gymnasts who were asked to perform two practice jumps on the beam three times per week for the entire six weeks between the pre-test and the post-test.

Each imagery participant performed her imagery routine three times per week, imaging the jump twice on each occasion, with interventions lasting around 3-5 minutes. The imagery participants and controls were instructed not to physically practice the skill for the duration of the experiment. Weekly check-ins were conducted with each participant and imagery diaries were kept.

2. PETTLEP Imagery group.
This group was provided an intervention and response training that included all seven PETTLEP components. Each gymnast was interviewed to provide information incorporated in creating their individualized imagery scripts. Typical response propositions included references to feelings of tension in the hands, sensations in the legs and the beam underneath the feet (physical and task components.) Other components recorded in the imagery tasks included emotion, task, environment, timing and perspective.) All PETTLEP components were represented in this group’s imagery.

3. Stimulus Imagery group.
The group was given stimulus training in which the stimulus details in the participants’ images (sight of the beam beneath them, gymnasium wall in front of them, smell of the gym) were solicited and reinforced. This group was provided with the same, stimulus proposition-laden imagery script, matched in length to the scripts provided for the PETTLEP group. They performed their imagery at home dressed in everyday clothing.

4. Control.
The control group was provided with a stretching program consisting of fie conditioning stretches from the British Gymnastics Handbook. A qualified instructor demonstrated all the stretches and participants were instructed to perform them three times per week for the duration of the study.

The self-reported data following the study were such that all the imagery participants reported that they perceived their imagery as effective in enhancing performance, suggesting that imagery of any kind is likely to enhance an athlete’s self-confidence.

Results

The physical practice and imagery groups all improved on the post-test, however, the control group did not improve. An analysis of variance revealed that the physical practice group increased by 43.93% from pre- to post-test. The PETTLEP group improved by 36.36%, and the Stimulus Imagery group improved 15.22%. These differences were statistically significant for the physical practice and PETTLEP imagery groups, yet, not significant for the stimulus imagery group.

In this study, the PETTLEP imagery appeared to be as effective as physically performing the task. It should be noted in normal circumstances, athletes would perform physical practice plus PETTLEP. Hence, the effect of using this model in the field may be even more dramatic than indicated by these results. In addition, for sports where the injury potential, overtraining concerns and athletic endeavors that provide reduced opportunities for recovery…PETTLEP imagery can be remarkably effective in supporting athletes physical efforts at enhancing their performance.

About the Author:

Dave Smith is Senior Lecturer in Sport and Exercise Psychology at Manchester Metropolitan University, England. He is accredited by the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) as a sport scientist and is Associate Editor of The Sport Psychologist. He is also a member of the Health and Exercise Committee of the Association of Applied Sport Psychology (AASP), and is the co-chair of the AASP Special Interest Group on Exercise and Wellness. He has published many articles in both scientific journals and popular magazines, and has appeared on television and radio all over the world to discuss his work. Recent publications include articles in the Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology and the British Journal of Sports Medicine.

PETTLEP Imagery 4 – A New Frontier in Mental Conditioning

Stephen Walker, PhD — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 18:26:49 +0000

Part 4 – Mind power:

By Dave Smith, Ph.D.
In collaboration with Stephen Walker, Ph.D. from Podium Sports Journal

What other Research has demonstrated the Effectiveness of PETTLEP Imagery?

In the March 2007 issue of the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, our department at the University of Chester published two research studies that provided interesting applications for the use of PETTLEP imagery (Smith, Wright, Allsopp & Westhead, 2007). These studies not only enabled us to evaluate the effectiveness of PETTLEP imagery, but we were also able to measure some specific components of PETTLEP in the various groups.

Study 1 – Field Hockey Penalty Flicks

Our goal was to determine whether the PETTLEP imagery method showed a discernable difference in enhancing athletic performance, when compared to traditional methods of imagery.

This study recruited 48 varsity field hockey players (24 male, 24 female, mean age = 20.37 years, SD = 3.26 years.) All of our recruits had previously performed the hockey penalty flick, but none of the subjects had previously received imagery training. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups, each consisting of 12 members. All subjects were required to keep an imagery diary that they were instructed to sign and date after each session.

The task employed to assess the effectiveness of the imagery method employed was the field hockey penalty flick taken from the penalty spot 6.5 meters in front of the center of the goal line. No goalkeeper was used but the scoring system accounted for the goal keeper’s presence. Participants were instructed to imagine the goalkeeper standing in the center of the goal when taking their penalty flicks. Participants were each allowed five practice shots prior to the pre-test and post-test, which consisted of 10 penalty flicks into a field hockey goal.

Scoring System – To account for the usual presence of a goal keeper, and to increase the face validity of the task, the scoring system rewarded more points for goals flicked into the top or bottom corner of the goal, while fewer points were awarded for shots above, below, or to either side of the goal keepers position. A minimum number of points were allowed for shots straight at the goal keeper. Missed shots or those not leaving the ground were awarded no points. A total of 30 points were possible for each pre-test and post-test trial.

The treatment groups were all introduced to imagery interventions that commenced with response training, following the pre-test. Response propositions may have included the sight of the hockey stick, ball and goal, and the sound of the stick hitting the ball. Some response propositions included the feeling of the hands gripping the hockey stick, the feelings of tension in the shoulder and arm muscles during a shot, and the sensation of the stick striking the ball. The groups focus and instructions were as follows:

1. Sport-specific imagery group.
This group performed imagery wearing their hockey uniforms while standing on their team’s hockey pitch (field.)

2. Clothing imagery group.
This group performed imagery in a standing position while at home and wearing their hockey uniforms.

3. Traditional imagery group.
This group performed imagery in a seated position at home wearing everyday clothes.

4. Control group.
This group spent an equivalent time reading hockey literature.

The sport specific group was the most focused PETTLEP imagery group employing most of the physical and environmental components. The clothing group also incorporated a number of PETTLEP components. The traditional imagery intervention also employed the task (imaging a goal shot), timing (imaging in real time) and perspective (imaging from an internal perspective) PETTLEP components.

Imagery practice was performed daily for six weeks. Each imagery session consisted of 10 imagined penalty flicks lasting around five minutes. Participants were involved with their normal hockey training and competitive matches during the study. Weekly checkups were conducted with each participant to ensure that the imagery instructions were being followed correctly.

The results included a self-reported measure that included the participants’ diaries and their self-report with respect to the benefit of the imagery practice. Virtually all participants in any form of imagery practice (excluding the control) reported that they felt their imagery practice was effective in enhancing their performance. Hence, this form of exercise is likely to be beneficial to an athlete’s confidence, even if their task execution proved to be lacking.

Results

The mean penalty flick scores of ALL FOUR GROUPS were greater in the post-test than in the pre-test. An analysis of variance revealed a significant effect for time. The imagery groups showed an even greater benefit. The sport-specific imagery group increased their mean score by 15.11%, while the clothing group increased their mean score by 9.47%, and, the traditional imagery group increased by 5.59%. The control group scores increased by 1.14%. Effect size calculations revealed that the treatment effects were large for the sport-specific and clothing imagery groups, while the traditional imagery group effects were moderate, yet also noteworthy.

Part 4 examined one applied research study utilizing a comparative survey of imagery methods including PETTLEP and more traditional imagery methods. Part 5 will examine research conducted with gymnasts learning a technical move on the balance beam. Stay tuned for the continuation of this series.

About the Author:

PETTLEP Imagery 3 – A New Frontier in Mental Conditioning

Stephen Walker, PhD — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:12:00 +0000

Part 3 – Mind power:

By Dave Smith, Ph.D.
In collaboration with Stephen Walker, Ph.D. from Podium Sports Journal

The first part of this series was focused on reviewing the mixed results found in imagery research for enhancing athletic performance. Part two examined certain factors in that research and new tools for measuring brain activity that have enabled researchers in understanding how and why certain imagery techniques are effective and others are not. The threshold of effectiveness was determined through applications of “functional equivalence” in the use of imagery techniques.

Since much of the research has been conducted in the laboratory and in controlled settings in the field, strength conditioning – weight training has enabled researchers to utilize incremental measurements and solid research design methodology for identifying discernable differences amongst treatment and control groups employed in the research.

One approach that has shown great promise was developed by Dr Paul Holmes of Manchester Metropolitan University and Professor Dave Collins of Edinburgh University. This approach, known as PETTLEP, is based on the functional equivalence research findings and studies conducted in our own lab in Liverpool. The PETTLEP model comprises the following elements: Physical, Environment, Task, Timing, Learning, Emotion and Perspective. Each element relates to important practical guidelines that trainees will find useful. Each element, and its practical implications are described below:

PETTLEP Imagery – How does it work?

Physical
It is important that the imagery technique used be as physically similar to actual weight training as possible. Therefore, you should imagine the muscle fatigue and discomfort you feel when actually training. You should also adopt the same posture as when actually performing the exercise. For example, if imaging leg extensions you should sit down, whereas if imaging standing calf raises you should stand upright. You can even make movements that approximate the actual exercise if you find that makes the experience more vivid. You should wear your gym clothes and even chalk your hands if that is what you do normally.

Environment
It is important to imagine performing your workout where you would actually perform it, to make the imagery realistic. To help, you could use a video or audiotape recorded at the gym where you train, and perform your imagery while listening to the same music they play at the gym. Particular features of the gym should be incorporated into the image. The imagery technique can be performed at the actual workstation, or in the gym itself. Every kinesthetic, auditory, and sensual stimulus assists in reaching functional equivalence.

Task
During the imagery you should focus attention on the same things you would during your actual workout. So, if you really focus in on the discomfort in the muscle when performing your set, and keep your attention on the muscle being worked, you should do this during your imagery. However, if you focus more on the rising and falling of the bar, do that in your imagery practice as well.

Timing
Preparation for and execution of your weight training exercises should be imaged in real time rather than slow motion. The whole of each set should be imaged, not just a couple of reps. Imaging taking the set from the first rep all the way through to failure. Even use the same rest periods as you would during your actual workout.

Learning
Changes in how movements feel will occur over time. Think back to the first time you performed the bench press. I’ll bet you felt really awkward and struggled to balance the bar evenly. However, within a short time you could perform the movement much more smoothly, and it felt totally different. Such learning effects occur with all movements, and therefore the bodily sensations that accompany movements will change over time. Your imagery should reflect this by involving the sensations that you actually feel when performing the movement, and as these change over time so should your imagery.

Emotion
Your imagery should also involve the emotions that you feel when performing your workout. Prior to and during a workout, most people feel physiologically and psychologically aroused, ready to give their all. This is also how you should feel prior to and during imagery. Contrary to the advice of some psychologists, you should not feel relaxed during movement imagery.

Perspective
Imagery can be performed in either the first person (internal imagery) or the third person (external imagery). In internal imagery, you imagine being inside your own body and seeing what you would see when in the imagined situation. In external imagery, you see yourself performing the task, like in a home movie. There is no simple answer as to which is best because people often report preferences for one or the other. Performing internal imagery will produce a more realistic imagery experience, and therefore should be generally preferred, but external imagery (i.e. seeing yourself lift really heavy weights) will be effective in improving confidence. Therefore, it may be best to use both, with internal imagery to rehearse the movement and external imagery to increase confidence.

Summary

This article has reviewed the general research assessing the effectiveness of imagery and visualization for athletic performance enhancement. The applications of imagery are extensive whether for relaxation, reducing arousal, or to enhance athletic skills such as strength training and motor performance.

For applications that encompass strength training we discussed examples and research that employs technique that approximates functional equivalence. Specific guidelines for weight training have been provided that incorporate the PETTLEP system. Other sports will require sport psychologists, coaches and athletes to systematically review both movements and kinaesthetic awareness employed in any athletic task for which an imagery program is being developed. This method requires patience and precision in its application if it is to achieve the optimal functional equivalence benchmark.

For strength training it is important to remember that the above model provides a useful framework to help guide your imagery practice. It is important to emphasise that imagery is not a shortcut to building strength. As with actual weight training, optimal improvements will only occur through hard work, dedication and the use of sound training techniques.

What other research has been done to validate this method of imagery? How can the principles of PETTLEP be used in application to other sports? Stay tuned for Part 4.

About the Author:

PETTLEP Imagery 2 – A New Frontier in Mental Conditioning

Stephen Walker, PhD — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:57:15 +0000

Part 2 – Mind power:

By Dave Smith, Ph.D.
In collaboration with Stephen Walker, Ph.D. from Podium Sports Journal

In Part 1, we explored the history of imagery use in athletic performance and reviewed the scientific literature, which offered mixed reviews on its effectiveness. Although more recent studies have demonstrated measurable benefits to the multitudes of athletes, coaches and sport psychologists who advocate the use of imagery – recent technological developments have furthered the ability to identify when, how and why certain types of imagery are more effective than traditional methods of visualization. So, what type of imagery works, and why?

Technology has enabled us to employ functional MRI, PET scans, and EEG measures to illustrate how the brain is stimulated and to what extent it is engaged in certain imagery techniques. Research on strength training has provided a specific domain for research which enables us to measure incremental improvement in physical performance, and establish controlled environments (both in the laboratory and the field.)

In Part 2, we clarify the criteria required for imagery to be successful and demonstrate one particular method that shows great promise for athletes in a variety of sports.

The Litmus Test – Functional Equivalence

The neurological similarities between real and imagined movements are known in the neuroscience literature as ‘functional equivalence.’ Further study of this body of research has shown that improvements in strength are not inevitable consequences of imagery….

In fact, research in our laboratory has shown that movement-related brain activity is most likely to occur when the imagery involves all the senses that would be involved in the situation being imaged.

For example, when imagery is applied to lifting weights, we have found that just visualizing weight lifting is ineffective. The imagery needs to be as realistic as possible….by imagining the feelings of tension in the muscles, the rapid heartbeat and breathing, the friction of the knurled bar against your hands, the music being played on the gym sound system, the smell of the gym, and so on.

Developing imagery skills should incorporate everything that you experience when actually weight training. The experience should be meaningful, vivid and realistic. Of particular importance are the physiological reactions that accompany your training: these appear to be important in enabling your imagery to be functionally equivalent to your actual training.

The Benchmark for Determining Functional Equivalence

In two recent studies we examined movement-related EEG activity, studying the brain wave activity known as late Contingent Negative Variation (CNV.) This illustrates an electrical brain potential related to movement preparation. This EEG wave takes the form of a negative shift from the EEG baseline, and is believed largely to reflect the nerve signals being sent from the cortex to the muscles to enable contraction. We found similar late CNV waves to occur prior to imagery and actual movement. However, in most cases this occurred only when the imagery emphasized the bodily feelings experienced during the movement (i.e. muscle tension and so on). When the imagery was primarily visual in nature (i.e. seeing yourself move but not feeling yourself move) there was no late CNV. These findings strongly suggest that multi-sensory involvement in imagery is necessary to achieve functional equivalence.

Unfortunately, the imagery advice given in bodybuilding books and magazines, by coaches and many sport psychologists, fails to take the above findings into account. For example, as noted in part 1 imagery is often referred to as ‘visualisation’, and trainees are often advised to ‘see themselves’ lifting weights. Articles containing such advice have appeared in magazines such as Muscle and Fitness, Flex and Men’s Fitness in the last couple of years. In such articles scant attention is paid to the importance of multi-sensory involvement in imagery. Such techniques are, however, likely to be less effective than the multi-sensory approach.

Updated Techniques for Sport Psychologists

Sport psychologists have commonly encouraged athletes to be relaxed during imagery, and techniques such as progressive muscle relaxation (involving the tensing and relaxing of muscle groups to reduce overall levels of tension) are often included as part of imagery training.

In addition, many psychologists advise that imagery should be performed lying down in a quiet environment. These suggestions do not take into account the neuroscience research findings noted above. The functional equivalence criteria must be met if imagery is to be effective.

Because sport psychologists ‘imported’ the use of “relaxed” imagery from clinical psychology, it is still commonly practiced. In clinical settings imagery is used as a therapeutic tool to help treat anxiety disorders. Patients are taught to imagine stress-invoking scenes, and then employ a relaxation technique alongside the imagery. Their goal is to help patients learn to associate the stressful situation with being calm and in control. As logical and effective as this technique is in attacking phobias, it is ineffective for helping an athlete use imagery to enhance athletic performance…unless it is specifically used to reduce performance anxiety.

Hence, the traditional, relaxation-based ‘visualisation’ approach to imagery is unlikely to be effective in enhancing strength. We now know that there are better guidelines available for trainees to enhance the effectiveness of their imagery.
How might we structure these imagery techniques? What research has been done to demonstrate its effectiveness? Stay tuned to Part 3.

About the Author:

PETTLEP Imagery 1 – A New Frontier in Mental Conditioning

Stephen Walker, PhD — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:48:40 +0000

Part 1 – Mind power:

By Dave Smith, Ph.D.
In collaboration with Stephen Walker, Ph.D. from Podium Sports Journal

Imagery in History

Sport psychology is a relatively new endeavour. Some would say that the study of the human mind is still in its infancy. When one considers human development however, imagery is one of the oldest methods ever used. Perhaps it deserves a new look and a new treatment. In both lab and field studies in the UK, one form of imagery is capturing the sporting world’s attention and initial results of one particular technique shows great promise as a tool for mental conditioning and peak performance.

Imagery, sometimes referred to as visualization, is a skill frequently used by athletes and performing artists to create or recreate a mental rehearsal of their performance. This technique in its earliest incarnations has been used for thousands of years and was once referenced in poetry written by Virgil in 20 BC.

Evidence for the Use of Imagery in Sport

The use of imagery in sport appears to have increased greatly over the past twenty years and has been accompanied by research into a wide range of mental conditioning skills designed to enhance physical performance in all manor of sporting endeavour. Surveys have shown that imagery is used in some form or another by the vast majority of elite athletes and most coaches. Virtually all sport psychologists are advocates of it as a key psychological technique.

Over one hundred studies have shown imagery to enhance the performance of just about every motor task imaginable. In our own research, we have found imagery to aid performance in basketball, karate, golf, field hockey, gymnastics and computer games. Is visualization and imagery effective? And how would bonafide research efforts in both the field and laboratory assess effectiveness….

Perhaps the most interesting of sports and exercise activities to use imagery and document the results of athlete performance is in strength training, body building and weightlifting. Not only does it provide an opportunity for both lab and field study, strength training gives us specific and incremental measures that we can use to assess its impact on performance.

Well known bodybuilders such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tom Platz, Arthur Jones and Ellington Darden have all advocated imagery as a means of enhancing muscle gains. But what does the research show?

Does Imagery Really Work in Strength Training?

In the published research, imagery has not always proved effective. For example, in 1995 a study conducted by a group of Israeli researchers, test subjects actually demonstrated a decrease in performance on the leg extension. Other findings in our review suggested imagery may not be useful for strength tasks. This review suggested that the result of imagery on strength building has been inconclusive.

As such, our labs at the University of Chester and Manchester Metropolitan University began to look more closely at the research design, specific descriptions of the type of imagery used and, other features that might be used to provide a better research design for our investigations.

In one paper, published in the International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology in 2003, we found that, on average, a group of individuals who imagined performing strength training exercises achieved about 50% of the gains experienced by individuals who actually performed a strength training programme. In another study published in the Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology in 2004, we presented findings that showed no difference between the effectiveness of real and imagined strength training in improving strength in novices. Another group of researchers in Iowa (USA) have presented similar findings, that imagery can significantly enhance muscle strength. Most recently, in a study currently in press at the International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology examining the effect of imagery on bicep curl performance, we found that a training programme consisting of one imagery session and one physical training session per week was actually more effective in enhancing biceps strength than two physical training sessions per week!

So why the different findings: why is it that imagery is sometimes effective and sometimes not?

New Tools Gave Science the Ability to Know When & How Imagery works

During the past 70 years, many theories have attempted to explain how imagery can enhance task performance. However, it was not until very recently, with the advent of modern brain scanning technologies, that this question has been at least partially answered. Research using techniques such as electroencephalography (EEG), positron emission tomography (PET) scans, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans, has revealed a rather startling phenomenon. That is, the areas of the brain that are active prior to and during movement are also active prior to and during imagery.

Many studies have shown such activity to be virtually identical, suggesting that imagery accesses the memory of a movement in much the same way as actual performance does.

Physiologically, it is known that the neurons in the motor areas of the brain fire in much the same way…whether you perform a task…or…vividly imagine performing it. Those firing patterns can be refined through repetitive use as the neural pathways become more defined. Both imagery to improve task performance and physical practice reinforce these firing patterns.

But how can this improve muscular strength?

Strength depends not only upon factors relating to the structure of the muscle, such as its size and predominant muscle fibre types, but also upon the ability of the central nervous system to recruit muscle fibres. This is known as neuromuscular efficiency. Some individuals can recruit a greater proportion of their muscle fibres than others, and our research suggests that this ability may be improved through imagery, thus increasing the amount of force the muscle can produce…hence, gains in strength.

However, it should also be noted that our research on imagery where a lack of specificity characterized the imagery technique failed to show any discernable benefit. Is there some characteristic of the imagery technique that allows users to actually recruit their muscle fibres in strength training? Stay tuned for Part 2.

About the Author: