The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus
Abstract
The present experiment was designed to test the predictions of the constrained-action hypothesis. This hypothesis proposes that when performers utilize an internal focus of attention (focus on their movements) they may actually constrain or interfere with automatic control processes that would normally regulate the movement, whereas an external focus of attention (focus on the movement effect) allows the motor system to more naturally self-organize. To test this hypothesis, a dynamic balance task (stabilometer) was used with participants instructed to adopt either an internal or external focus of attention. Consistent with earlier experiments, the external focus group produced generally smaller balance errors than did the internal focus group and responded at a higher frequency indicating higher confluence between voluntary and reflexive mechanisms. In addition, probe reaction times (RTs) were taken as a measure of the attention demands required under the two attentional focus conditions. Consistent with the hypothesis, the external focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did the internal focus participants, indicating a higher degree of automaticity and less conscious interference in the control processes associated with the balance task.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Wulf, McNevin, and Shea (2001), external-focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than internal-focus participants, indicating reduced attention demands associated with an external focus.
“External-focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did internal-focus participants, indicating reduced attention demands associated with an external focus.”
From Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning (2002) · cites this paper as Wulf, McNevin, & Shea, 2001
Cites
The Learning Advantages of an External Focus of Attention in Golf
Wulf, G., Lauterbach, B., & Toole, T. (1999) · Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · doi:10.1080/02701367.1999.10608029 · Cited by 420 · cited 3× · see citing works
“More recently, evidence for the learning advantages of inducing an external focus of attention have also been found for sport skills such as golf (Wulf et al., 1999), tennis (Maddox, Wulf, & Wright, 2000), volleyball and soccer (Wulf, McConnel, Gärtner, & Schwarz, 2000).”
BackgroundResultSelf-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- Abernethy B., 1988, Journal of Human Movement Studies, 14, 101
- 10.1016/0306-4522(95)00136-7 · DOI
- 10.1080/713755890 · DOI
- Maddox D., 2000, The effects of an internal vs. external focus of attention on the learning of a tennis backhand
- McLeod P. D., 1978, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 83-39
- 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61971-8 · DOI
- McNevin N. H., 2000, Increasing the distance of an external focus of attention enhances learning
- Newell K. M., 1996, Motor control and human skill: A multidisciplinary perspective.
- Posner M. I., 1969, Proceedings of the 16th Congress of Applied Psychology.
- 10.1080/00222895.1976.10735068 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0167-9457(99)00031-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0096-1523.25.6.1579 · DOI
- 10.1080/00222895.1992.9941608 · DOI
- 10.1093/ptj/72.4.306 · DOI
- 10.1080/00222895.1978.10735148 · DOI
- Wulf G., 2000, Feedback and attentional focus: Enhancing the learning of sport skills through external-focus feedback
- 10.1080/00222899809601334 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/02701367.2000.10608903 · DOI
- Wulf G., Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
- Wulf G., Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9 · Cited by 1,238 · see citing works
Self-citationMotor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors
Wulf, G., Shea, C., & Lewthwaite, R. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03421.x · Cited by 898 · see citing works
Self-citationPrinciples derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning
Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2002) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196276 · Cited by 829 · see citing works
Self-citationDirecting attention to movement effects enhances learning: a review
Wulf, G., & Prinz, W. (2001) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196201 · Cited by 729 · see citing works
Self-citationZachry, T., Wulf, G., Mercer, J., & Bezodis, N. (2005) · Brain Research Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2005.06.035 · Cited by 497 · see citing works
Self-citationAn external focus of attention enhances golf shot accuracy in beginners and experts
Wulf, G., & Su, J. (2007) · Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · doi:10.1080/02701367.2007.10599436 · Cited by 404 · see citing works
Self-citationExtrinsic feedback for motor learning after stroke: What is the evidence?
van Vliet, P. M., & Wulf, G. (2006) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638280500534937 · Cited by 354 · see citing works
Self-citationAttention and Motor Performance: Preferences for and Advantages of an External Focus
Wulf, G., Shea, C., & Park, J.-H. (2001) · Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · doi:10.1080/02701367.2001.10608970 · Cited by 316 · see citing works
Self-citationIncreased jump height and reduced EMG activity with an external focus
Wulf, G., Dufek, J. S., Lozano, L., & Pettigrew, C. (2010) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2009.11.008 · Cited by 257 · see citing works
Self-citationKal, E. C., van der Kamp, J., & Houdijk, H. (2013) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2013.04.001 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Kajzer Mitchell, I., & Walinga, J. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.162 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Altering mindset can enhance motor learning in older adults.
Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/a0025718 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Self-citationJohnson, L., Burridge, J. H., & Demain, S. H. (2013) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20120300 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Additive benefits of external focus and enhanced performance expectancy for motor learning
Pascua, L. A. M., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2015) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2014.922693 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Self-citationGokeler, A., Benjaminse, A., Hewett, T. E., Paterno, M. V., Ford, K. R., Otten, E., & Myer, G. D. (2013) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.1007/s40279-013-0095-0 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
External focus and autonomy support: Two important factors in motor learning have additive benefits
Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Drews, R. (2015) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2014.11.015 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Self-citationEnhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting
Palmer, K., Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2016) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.009 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Self-citationThe self: Your own worst enemy? A test of the self-invoking trigger hypothesis
McKay, B., Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., & Nordin, A. (2015) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.997765 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Self-citationExternal-Focus Feedback Benefits Free-Throw Learning in Children
Perreault, M. E., & French, K. E. (2015) · Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · doi:10.1080/02701367.2015.1051613 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Shorer, Z., Becker, B., Jacobi-Polishook, T., Oddsson, L., & Melzer, I. (2012) · European Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1007/s00431-012-1695-7 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Tang, Q. P., Yang, Q. D., Wu, Y. H., Wang, G. Q., Huang, Z. L., Liu, Z. J., Huang, X. S., Zhou, L., Yang, P. M., & Fan, Z. Y. (2005) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/85.10.1020 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
An External Skill Focus is Necessary to Enhance Performance
Russell, R., Porter, J., & Campbell, O. (2014) · Journal of Motor Learning and Development · doi:10.1123/jmld.2014-0038 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wulf, G., McNevin, N., & Shea, C. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Reading (GB)
- Wayne State University (US)
- Texas A&M University (US)
- ORCID
- Wulf, Gabriele
- Venue
- The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1143-1154
- ISSN
- 0272-4987 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0740
- OpenAlex
- W2128165162
- Cited by
- 1,163
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 51 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 86 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 83 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 65 · 2012: 31
- FWCI
- 15.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
- Keywords
- attentional focus, internal focus, external focus, motor skill learning, automaticity, constrained action hypothesis, dynamic balance, stabilometer, attentional demands, reaction time
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Automatism, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Motor Skills, Random Allocation, Reaction Time
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
