The impact of motivational imagery on the emotional state and self-efficacy levels of novice climbers.
Jones, Marc V. ; Bray, Steven R. ; Mace, Roger D. 等
This study examined the impact of an imagery script intervention on
the levels of perceived stress, self-efficacy and climbing performance
of volunteer female participants. Novice climbers were randomly assigned
to either a control group, or to an imagery intervention group. Each
participant attended four sessions, during which they practiced basic
climbing techniques and took part in either a light exercise program
(control group) or a scripted imagery training program (experimental
group). The imagery script comprised both motivational general-mastery
and motivational general-arousal types of imagery. During the testing
session the participants climbed a 5.1 meter climbing wall following a
designated route. Pre-climb levels of self-efficacy and perceived stress
were measured. Perceived stress levels were also assessed on three
occasions during the climb itself The experimental group reported
significantly lower levels of perceived stress before and during the
climb and higher levels of self-efficacy in thei r ability to execute
the correct technique during the climb. There was no significant
difference in climbing performance between groups. The results are
consistent with the propositions of Martin, Moritz and Hall's
(1999) conceptual model of mental imagery use in sport and suggest that
motivational general-mastery and motivational general-arousal types of
imagery can be effective in controlling emotions during athletic
activity and may also enhance self-efficacy.
The beneficial use of imagery in sport settings has been documented
by a number of athletes, for example, Tiger Woods in golf(Vealey &
Greenleaf, 1998), Sylvie Bernier in diving (Butler, 1996) and supported
by compelling research evidence (e.g., Feltz & Landers, 1983;
Martin, Mortiz & Hall, 1999). Imagery is commonly defined as
"... quasi-sensory and quasi-perceptual experiences of which we are
self-consciously aware and which exist for us in the absence of those
stimulus conditions that are known to produce their genuine sensory or
perceptual counterparts" (Richardson, 1969; pp. 2-3). This is
distinct from mental rehearsal in that imagery refers to a mental
process or mode of thought, whereas mental rehearsal is defined as the
employment of imagery to mentally practice an act (Hardy, Jones &
Gould, 1996). Recently, Martin et al. (1999) presented a conceptual
framework of imagery use in sport, identifying four key factors relating
to its use: the sport situation, the type of imagery used, imagery
ability, and outcomes associated with imagery use. Although the sport
situation (training, competition, rehabilitation) and imagery ability
(kinesthetic, visual) are recognized as being important aspects of
imagery use, the present study was particularly concerned with the type
of imagery used and the outcomes associated with imagery use, focusing
specifically on the use of imagery to change cognitions and control
emotions.
Past research by Paivio (1985) has identified that imagery serves
both cognitive and motivational functions. Using Paivio's original
taxonomy of imagery function as a basis, Hall, Mack, Paivio and
Hausenblas (1998) identified five functions of imagery in the
development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire, recently incorporated by
Martin, et al. (1999) in to their conceptual model of imagery use in
sport settings. The five functions of imagery include,
motivational-specific, motivational general-mastery, motivational
general-arousal, cognitive specific, and finally, cognitive general.
Martin et al. (1999) proposed that the five types of imagery are
functionally orthogonal. That is, while an athlete may choose to use
only one type of imagery it is also possible for him or her to
experience two or more types simultaneously. However, Martin et al.
(1999) also caution that what is critical to the potential effectiveness
of an imagery intervention is that, regardless of the different types of
imagery contained with in a script, the type(s) of imagery used should
be consistent with, and appropriate for, the desired outcome(s). In
other words, it is important to consider the imagery function, which is
distinct from imagery content (Monroe, Giacobbi, Hall, & Weinberg,
2000). Martin et al's. (1999) conceptual model outlined three
outcomes of imagery use, including improving skilled performance,
however the two of particular relevance to this study were modifying
cognitions and arousal and competitive anxiety regulation.
Martin et al. (1999) proposed that motivational general-mastery
imagery, which refers to effective coping and mastery of challenging
situations (e.g., imagining feeling confident while climbing a difficult
rock face) may be used to modify cognitions, and specifically may be
beneficial in terms of increasing self-efficacy and self-confidence.
Indeed, Bandura's self-efficacy theory (1997) identifies imaginal experiences as a determinant of self-efficacy. Consistent with theory,
research by Feltz and Riessinger (1990) found that participants who
underwent imagery treatment aimed at generating images of competence and
performing better than their opponent on an isometric quadriceps task
(i.e., motivational general-mastery imagery) had higher expectations of
doing well. Callow, Hardy and Hall (1998) reported similar findings for
self-confidence when they conducted a motivational general-mastery
imagery intervention with badminton players.
The use of motivational general-mastery imagery in modifying
cognitions may also be associated with athletes responding with a more
positive emotional state when placed in stressful situations. Many
emotion theorists (e.g., Lazarus 1991) have emphasized the role of
cognition in emotion, and an individual who perceives him or herself as
being better able to cope in a stressful situation, through the use of
motivational general-mastery imagery, may very well experience a more
positive emotional state than an individual who perceives that they
cannot cope.
In addition to modifying cognitions Martin et al. (1999) also
proposed that imagery, and specifically motivational general-arousal
imagery, could be used as an effective tool to regulate arousal and
competitive anxiety. Motivational general-arousal imagery focuses on
feelings such as relaxation, stress, arousal and anxiety in conjunction
with sport competition (e.g., imagining feeling excited as you take the
field for your first-ever international match in cricket). Martin et al.
utilized Bioinformational Theory (Lang, 1977, 1979) as a theoretical
explanation for why motivational general-arousal imagery may be useful
in regulating arousal and competitive anxiety. According to Lang's
theory, when an individual imagines a situation, he or she activates a
stimulus proposition, which describes the content of the image and
contextual factors (Hardy, Jones & Gould, 1996). For example, if an
individual were to imagine taking a penalty kick in a soccer match s/he
would see the goal, the crowd, teammates, and would al so be aware of
contextual factors such as the number of minutes remaining in the game
and the match score. In addition to activating a stimulus proposition,
an image activates a particular response proposition for that image. The
response proposition determines the situational emotional response,
which may include some excitement (e.g., it is a chance to win the
game), some apprehension (e.g., what if I miss?) and some physiological
symptoms (e.g., butterflies in the stomach).
Martin et al. (1999) suggest the use of motivational
general-arousal imagery to modify response propositions to a particular
stimulus should enable athletes to change undesirable emotional
responses during stressful situations. Indeed, there is some empirical
support for the contention that emotional states can be manipulated
through the use of imagery. For example, Lee (1990) reported
participants who imagined a situation in which they felt happy and
confident prior to a sit up task reported higher levels of vigor and
lower levels of fatigue than participants who imagined doing the task
itself, and a control group.
Although there is some support for the successful manipulation of
emotional arousal using mental imagery, there is less empirical evidence
indicating that imagery can be used to manage arousal or competitive
anxiety prior to and during physical activity in naturalistic settings
(e.g., sport contests). The strongest evidence has come from studies
where imagery was incorporated with other stress management techniques,
(see Mace, 1990 for a review). This evidence is supplemented by
qualitative accounts reported in a recent study by Munroe, Giacobbi,
Hall and Weinberg (2000) who interviewed 14 elite athletes about aspects
of imagery use. Athletes indicated that imagery was not only used to
increase excitement and get "psyched up", but was also used to
maintain composure during competition. However, thus far there has been
no quantitative research that has examined the effectiveness of imagery
alone, in enabling athletes to control emotions during sports
performance.
While Martin et al.'s (1999) model indicates that motivational
general-arousal imagery should be effective in regulating arousal and
anxiety (and presumably other emotions e.g., excitement, distress) it is
important that any research testing this proposal focuses not only
emotional states prior to, but also during the activity itself - when
emotions are likely to have the greatest effect on effort, persistence
and performance (cf. Bandura, 1997). Indeed, given that an
individual's emotional state is likely to be highly transient,
Jones (1991) noted that reliance on measuring pre-competitive anxiety,
which can change seconds after the competition begins, is a serious
limitation. This point is clearly illustrated in the results of a study
by Krane, Joyce and Rafeld (1994) who measured softball players'
anxiety levels immediately prior to their entering the batter's
box. Results showed that anxiety levels changed throughout the game
depending on how important the situation was to the outcome of the game.
Similar findings were reported by Jones, Mace and Williams (2000) who
found international field hockey players experienced greater levels of
annoyance and less tension during the game compared to immediately
before.
The assessment of emotions prior to performance as well as during
the event itself has important implications for the evaluation of the
benefits of motivational general-arousal imagery as a strategy to
regulate emotional states. Therefore, the primary purpose of the present
study was to examine the effect of a motivational guided imagery script
intervention on novice climbers' emotional states. Consistent with
Martinet al.'s (1999) recommendations, the imagery script
incorporated motivational general-arousal imagery in order to manipulate
climbers' perceived stress levels prior to and during the climb. It
was hypothesized that exposure to a motivational general-arousal imagery
script intervention would be associated with lower levels of perceived
stress in an intervention group, compared to no treatment controls. A
secondary purpose of the study was to examine the impact of the imagery
script intervention on self-efficacy levels prior to the climb. Thus, in
addition to motivational general-arousal imagery, th e imagery script
contained elements of motivational general-mastery imagery (as it
detailed a successful climb). In line with Martin et al.'s
propositions and the theorizing of Bandura (1997), self-efficacy prior
to the climb was expected to be higher among participants who engaged in
imagery compared to controls.
The use of an imagery script intervention addressing two functions
of imagery attends to Martin et al.'s (1999) call for controlled
experiments that examine several of their model's components
concurrently. Further to this end, we assessed climbing performance as
an additional outcome variable. According to Martinet al.'s model,
cognitive specific imagery (imagining specific sport skills) and
cognitive general imagery (imagining competitive strategies) are the
types of imagery most likely to relate to performance. However, because
specific movement patterns were likely to differ from person to person,
depending on factors such as height, flexibility, reach and athletic
ability, the imagery script was purposely devoid of cognitive specific
and cognitive general imagery for the climb itself, and accordingly, no
differences in performance between the intervention and control groups
were expected.
Method
Participants and Design
The participants were 33 female volunteers between 18 years and 48
years of age (M = 22.33, SD= 5.63) who had no previous climbing
experience. They were either undergraduate students (n = 30), or
employees (n = 3) at a college of higher education recruited to the
study by posters placed in the college. All participants provided
informed consent prior to participation in the study.
Participants were randomly assigned to either an experimental group
(n= 16, M years of age = 21.63, SD = 3.12), who underwent an imagery
script intervention, or a control group (n = 17, M years of age 23.00,
SD = 7.31) who took part in a light exercise program. The exercises
performed by the control group involved stretching and low impact
aerobic exercise and were not expected to have any significant benefits
for climbing performance. Indeed, a similar control procedure alongside
an imagery intervention has been successfully utilized in previous
research by Hardy and Callow (1999). In order to ensure safety and to
give participants some experience at the task upon which to base their
imagery and self-efficacy, all participants received climbing
instruction supervised by an experienced climber. In total, participants
attended four one-hour sessions in their groups (experimental or
control), scheduled at the same time, on the same day, for 4 consecutive
weeks. All of the sessions took place in the same sports facility, which
had a climbing wall at one end. To ensure that each participant received
an appropriate amount of attention from the instructor, groups were
limited in size to no more than 10. In total, 37 participants attended
the training sessions and attempted the climb, however four participants
were unable to complete the climb and their data were not analyzed.
Task and Apparatus
Each participant climbed a 5.1 meter climbing wall along a route
marked in white chalk. The route consisted of three climbing stages
followed by a passive descent. In Stage I, participants climbed directly
upwards to a designated point, 3.65 meters above the ground. Stage 2
involved a climbing traverse to the left, across the face of the wall to
another designated point, 4.07 meters off the ground. The third stage of
the climb required participants to climb directly upwards to tag a white
sling above the top of the wall, 5.1 meters off the ground. Upon
completion of Stage 3 of the climb, participants were lowered to the
ground. Standard equipment such as climbing harnesses, safety helmets,
and an 11 millimeter climbing top rope were used in the climbing task.
Measures
Perceived Stress. The Perceived Stress Index (PSI; Jacobs &
Munz, 1968) was used to assess perceived stress prior to and during the
test climb. This measure was constructed from an original list of 208
adjectives (generated by psychology students as describing emotional or
affective states) using two well-established psychometric techniques;
Thurstone's method of Equal-Appearing Intervals and Osgod's
Semantic Differential. The final inventory consists of 15 single-word or
phrase items that describe how an individual is feeling at a specific
moment in time. The scale was designed to measure a continuum of stress
ranging from extreme positive stress (eustress) to extreme negative
stress (distress). Items range from feelings of thrilled to extremely
terrified. Each phrase or word has a corresponding numerical intensity
weighting, with those phrases or words denoting stronger perceived
negative stress assigned higher weightings than those denoting stronger
perceived positive stress (e.g., thrilled = 1.97; extrem ely terrified =
10.72).
Respondents complete the PSI by selecting one item from a 15-item
scale continuum that best describes how they are feeling at the present
moment. Although single-item measures have been criticized because their
reliability can not be determined, their utility has been touted when
situational constraints prohibit the use of multiple item scales (cf.
Wanous et al., 1997). We selected the PSI on the basis of its
established validity in general psychology (see Jacobs & Munz, 1968)
as well as its ease of completion. In addition, it has been used in
previous research to assess perceived stress levels in sporting tasks
such as abseiling and gymnastics (Mace & Carroll, 1985; 1989).
Furthermore, because a major purpose of the study was to examine
emotional stress throughout a continuous activity that required constant
attention, it was reasoned that a more detailed measure could have
interfered with the attentional demands of the climbing task.
Self-efficacy. We are not aware of any existing instruments that
assess climbing self-efficacy. Therefore, we developed two items
designed to measure participants' self-efficacy prior to climbing:
How confident are you of climbing well using the appropriate techniques
that you have been taught (e.g., three contact points on the wall?) and
How confident are you of climbing to the best of your ability?. Although
a more comprehensive list of specific items relating to climbing
abilities could have been generated, it was felt that because
participants had a minimal amount of experience performing the task that
items reflecting a perception of climbing efficacy in general would be
more correspondent with their actual capabilities at their novice skill
level. Thus, the two items were designed to measure separate, but
related components of general climbing self-efficacy representative of
abilities to a) utilize appropriate techniques and b) climb to the best
of her ability. The response scale for each item ranged fro m I not at
all to 4 very much so. Although not the scaling format advocated by
Bandura (1997), Likert scales have been found to correlate highly with
levels of self-efficacy (Maurer & Pierce, 1998) and allow for more
generally worded questions (Mudgett & Quinones, 1997) as were
required in the present assessment.
Climbing Performance. Climbing performance was assessed by two
qualified mountaineering instructors who were blind as to the nature of
the experiment. Each instructor independently watched a video recording
of the climb and rated each participant's climbing technique on a
10 point scale anchored by 1 (very poor) and 10 (excellent). The
instructors looked for an agreed set of characteristics, incorporating,
three contact points on the wall, confidence of movement, and minimum
foot or hand hold slips. The scores from each instructor were combined
yielding a total score for each participant out of 20.
Covariate Measures
In order to examine and control for possible pre-existing
differences between groups, participants completed a series of
questionnaires assessing trait anxiety and perceived value of their
climbing training as well as a task assessing their fear of heights.
Trait Anxiety. The Trait Anxiety Scale of the State Trait Anxiety
Inventory - Form Y2 (Spielberger, 1983) was used to assess trait
anxiety. The questionnaire required participants to respond to 20
statements indicating how they generally felt on a 4-point scale ranging
from 1 (Almost never) to 4 (Almost always). The Trait-Anxiety Scale has
demonstrated concurrent and predictive validity, good psychometric
characteristics, and adequate test-retest reliability (Spielberger,
1983).
Perceived Value of the Training. Participants rated how useful they
thought the training provided before the testing session was in
preparing them for the climb. Ratings were in response to a single item,
which asked "How useful was the training you did in preparing you
for the climb?" and were assessed on a scale ranging from I (not
useful) to 4 (very useful).
Fear of Heights Test. In order to assess participants'
emotional responses while at heights, each participant completed a
simple test of fear of heights prior to testing. Participants climbed up
a Y-frame step ladder to a step 2.7 meters off the ground at which point
they were asked to choose a word or phrase from the Perceived Stress
Index that best described how they were feeling at that time.
Procedure
The climbing training was identical for both experimental and
control groups. The experimental protocol differed only when the
experimental group underwent imagery training and mentally imaged
themselves performing the climb at which time, to control for attention
placebo effects, the control group engaged in a light exercise program.
Session 1. Participants were given a general introduction to the
study, followed by the fear of heights test. This was followed by a
general introduction to basic climbing techniques and equipment given by
an experienced climber. After the introduction, the participants were
allowed to climb up the wall face to feel what the holds felt like in
order to enhance the quality of the imagery for the experimental group.
The control group underwent the same training to control for attention
placebo effects. The participants used all parts of the wall and not
just the areas that would be used in the climb. At no time were the
participants allowed to climb higher than a few feet off the ground.
Following the first instruction session, the first experimental
manipulation took place. Participants in the experimental group were
given an introduction, comprising a brief handout and short talk
outlining the use of imagery in sport and some potential benefits (e.g.,
skill acquisition, mental preparation for sport activities). It was
important to provide a rationale for the intervention as Bandura (1997)
noted the importance of outlining to athletes the benefits of cognitive
strategies, to ensure motivation and adherence to the program. After
this introduction, the experimenter instructed participants to be seated
in a comfortable position while he read through an imagery script
detailing a successful climb up the wall. The imagery script (available
from the first author) took about 5 minutes to read and was designed to
reflect two of the five major types of imagery identified by Martin et
al. (1999): motivational general-arousal (emotional control while on the
wall), and motivational general-mastery (feel ing confident and focused
as they moved up to the top). Following the first intervention session,
participants met briefly with the experimenter who informally inquired
as to the content of the session. In every case, participants indicated
they understood the script and were able to imagine themselves
performing the activity as described.
Over the four experimental sessions the participants engaged in
approximately 70 minutes of actual imagery comprising 20 minutes of
vividness training and 50 minutes mentally rehearsing the climb. This
procedure is comparable to similar studies in the area, for example Lee
and Hewitt (1987) asked gymnasts to image the four routines they were
practicing (vault, bars, beam, floor) once a week for six weeks.
Similarly, Burhans Ill, Richman, Bergey (1988) asked participants to
image for 5-10 minutes prior to each training and test run over an 8
week period.
Participants in the control group were given a short talk, about
how being physically fit can improve climbing ability. Again, in line
with Bandura's (1997) suggestions, a rationale was provided for the
use of physical exercise to ensure participants motivation and adherence
to the program. The talk was followed by 5 minutes of stretching and
aerobic exercises.
Session 2. All participants began the session by completing
Spielberger's Trait Anxiety Test followed by a 5-minute stretching
warm-up and practiced climbing the wall as outlined in session 1 (10
minutes). The participants in the experimental group then took part in
an imagery vividness exercise (5 minutes), based on those outlined in
Mace (1994) and were read the imagery script twice (10 minutes). During
this time the participants in the control group engaged in light
exercises. Participants from both groups then practiced climbing the
wall a second time (10 minutes). Again, while the participants in the
experimental group took part in imagery vividness exercises (5 minutes)
and were read the imagery script twice (10 minutes) participants in the
control group engaged in light exercise (15 minutes).
Session 3. This session was identical to Session 2, other than
Spielberger's Trait Anxiety Test was not completed, and thus the
session began with a 5-minute stretching warm-up for all participants.
Session 4. The fourth session incorporated further training as well
as a testing session. Participants from both groups began the session by
warming up for 5 minutes. Following the warm-up, participants in the
experimental group were read the imagery script once and the controls
had 5 minutes of gentle exercise. All participants completed the testing
session that followed on their own (i.e., independent of any other study
participants with whom they had been grouped for training sessions).
Testing Session. Present at the testing session were the
participant, principal experimenter, an experienced climber, a qualified
climbing instructor, and a technician who videotaped the climb. The
order in which the participants climbed was determined randomly for both
groups. When it was her turn, each participant put on a climbing harness
and was taken to the wall and clipped to the climbing rope. Participants
were reminded of the route to take and directed to the three points on
the route where they were to stop and read aloud the word from the
Perceived Stress Index that best described how they were feeling at that
point during the climb. The participant then completed the self-efficacy
questionnaire, chose a word from the Perceived Stress Index to indicate
how she was feeling, and began the climb. Each participant completed the
climb as outlined in the task section. Immediately after the climb,
participants completed their rating of how useful the training had been
in preparing them for the climb. The p articipants were then debriefed
as to the nature of the experiment and thanked for their participation.
Results
Potential Covariates
In order to examine and control for any potential confounding due
to differences between groups, scores for the fear of heights test,
trait anxiety, and ratings of training usefulness were compared between
experimental and control groups. Results revealed no significant
(p's > .10) differences between the groups on the fear of
heights test, t(31) = 0.05, trait anxiety, t(31) = 1.17, and ratings of
training usefulness, t(31) = 0.36. Thus, experimental and control groups
were considered homogenous with regards to these potential covariates
and they were not controlled for in subsequent analyses.
Perceived Stress Levels Before and During the Climb
The means for each group on the Perceived Stress Index at the
pre-climb stage and at the three stages during the climb are shown in
Table 1. Perceived stress at the four stages was analyzed using a 2
(group) X 4 (stage) general linear model ANOVA with repeated measures on
the second factor (stage). The data were initially examined using both
Mauchly's Test of Sphericity and Levene's Test of Equality of
Error Variances and the data satisfied the assumptions underlying a two
factor ANOVA with repeated measures on one factor.
A significant main effect was observed for group, F(1, 31) = 4.64,
p < .05, with the experimental group reporting lower average
perceived stress levels over the 4 stages of the climb (M = 5.44, SD =
1.93) than the control group (M = 6.38, SD = 2.01). There was also a
significant main effect for stage, F(3, 93) = 3.97, p < .05,
indicating perceived stress levels changed over the course of the climb,
however, the interaction between stage and group was not significant,
F(3, 93) 0.37.
Pre-climb Self-Efficacy
The two climbing self-efficacy items correlated significantly r =
.41, p < .05, but the internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha =
.58) of the two-item scale was not appropriate for aggregation
(Nunnally, 1978). Thus, self-efficacy for technical climbing and
self-efficacy for climbing to the best of ability were analyzed
separately. The experimental group (M 2.88, SD = .50) reported higher
technical climbing self-efficacy than the control group (M = 2.41, SD =
.80). A significant Levene's test, F= 6.71 ,p <.05, indicated
the variances between experimental and control group scores were
unequal. An independent groups t-test with equal variances not assumed
revealed the difference in scores between groups was significant,
t(27.15) = 2.02, p = .05. A trend in higher self-efficacy for climbing
to the best of ability was also observed. The experimental group (M =
3.19, SD = .66) reported higher scores than the control group (M = 2.71,
SD = .85) on this variable, however, the difference between groups was
just outside the traditional level of significance, t(31) = 1.82, p =
.08.
Climbing Performance
The ratings of climbing performance from the two experienced
climbing instructors correlated significantly (r = .88, p < .05),
indicating good inter-rater agreement. Consequently, both ratings were
summed to form a composite performance score. The performance scores did
not differ significantly, t(31) = 1.57, p > .05, between the
experimental group (M = 14.81, SD = 2.59) and the control group (M =
13.76, SD = 2.61).
Table 1
Group Means and Standard Deviations for the Perceived Strees Index
During the Climb
Experimental Group Control Group
M S.D M S.D.
Pre Climb 5.35 1.53 6.56 1.85
Stage 1 5.63 1.95 6.50 1.82
Stage 2 6.30 2.01 6.76 1.69
Stage 3 4.49 1.91 5.73 2.57
Discussion
The present study examined the impact of an imagery script
intervention on the levels of perceived stress, self-efficacy and
climbing performance of volunteer female participants. The purpose was
to test selected predictions of the conceptual model proposed by Martin
et al. (1999) in a sport situation likely to engender a strong emotional
response. The results supported Martin et al.'s predictions in that
novice climbers who took part in an imagery script intervention
comprising both motivational general-arousal and motivational
general-mastery imagery reported lower perceived stress compared to
controls, both before and during the climb. Furthermore, results offer
partial support for the prediction that motivational general-mastery
imagery use would result in higher levels of self-efficacy in the
experimental group compared to controls prior to the test climb. While
no differences in climbing performance were observed between groups,
this finding is also consistent with Martin et al.'s assertion that
the use of motivational general-arousal or motivational general-mastery
imagery may not be directly associated with the enhanced performance of
sport skills.
The primary finding of this study was the main effect associated
with a motivational imagery intervention in decreasing the negative
stress experienced by novice participants during an intense athletic
activity (i.e., climbing). Specifically, in line with the predictions of
Martin et al. (1999), the participants in the imagery script
intervention group reported significantly lower levels of perceived
stress over the four stages assessed compared to the control group. This
finding is also consistent with both theory (Bioinformational Theory:
Lang, 1977, 1979) and previous research on imagery and stress management
(see Mace, 1990). Yet, as noted above, in those studies the independent
effects of imagery could not be ascertained because previous research
incorporated imagery in conjunction with other stress management
techniques (e.g., relaxation training). Therefore, this study represents
a first attempt, based on the recommendations of Martin et al. (1999),
to examine the impact of imagery, alone, on emotional control in a
stressful sport situation. However, we should also note that these
findings are complimentary to those recently reported by Munroe et al.
(2000) who found that some athletes used motivational general-arousal
imagery to control emotions during competition. Taken together, the
results of Munroe et al. and those observed in the present study provide
strong initial evidence for the internal and external validity of
motivational general-arousal imagery as a factor that can be used to
manage emotions before and during sport performance.
The secondary purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of
the imagery script intervention on participants' self-efficacy
levels. The findings offered partial support for the notion that
motivational general-mastery imagery may be used to enhance
self-efficacy. Participants in the experimental group reported
significantly higher levels of self-efficacy for climbing technique and
a trend towards higher self-efficacy for climbing to the best of their
ability, prior to starting the climb. Although not conclusive, these
findings are consistent with both theory (Bandura, 1997) and previous
research (Callow et al., 1998; Feltz & Riessinger, 1990). Bandura
(1997) points out that mastery experiences are the most powerful
determinants of self-efficacy, but that imaginal experiences are another
potential antecedent. All participants in this study had equivalent
opportunities to practice climbing techniques on a vertical wall,
however, the participants exposed to the imagery script intervention
were more effica cious in their technical climbing abilities prior to
the test session, supporting the notion of imaginal experiences as a
determinant of self-efficacy beliefs.
Although the findings of the study are promising, there are gaps in
what we were able to assess in terms of theory and the role of imagery
in the management of emotion, self-efficacy, and performance. From our
data, it is not possible to determine which aspects of the imagery
script (motivational general-arousal or motivational general-mastery)
contributed to the lower levels of perceived stress. Martin et al.
(1999) suggest that consistent with Lang's Bioinformational Theory,
the use of motivational general-arousal imagery to modify response
propositions to a particular stimulus should enable athletes to change
undesirable emotional responses during stressful situations. However, it
is also possible that the lower levels of perceived stress reported by
the participants in the experimental group were associated with a
perception of being better able to cope due to the motivational
general-mastery imagery. The results of previous research by Vadocz,
Hall and Moritz (1997), which documented relationships betwee n anxiety
and motivational general-arousal, but found no relationship between
anxiety and motivational general-mastery imagery suggest this
possibility is unlikely. However, from both research and applied
perspectives it is important to recognize that there may be two routes
to manipulating stress with imagery use. Our findings illustrate that
using motivational general-arousal and motivational general-mastery
imagery in combination is an effective way of reducing perceived stress
prior to and throughout an intense activity. Future research aimed at
teasing apart the functions of various imagery use components in
relation to emotions such as perceived stress is required.
The study might also have been strengthened had a measure been
taken of the participants' abilities to image successfully. Martin
et al. (1999) indicated that imagery ability is an individual difference
variable that could moderate the relationship between imagery use and
outcomes such as performance. Given the random assignment of
participants to groups in the present study, any effect associated with
imagery ability in the intervention group contributed to error variance.
Because it is unlikely that everyone in the intervention group was
either high or low in imagery ability, the fact that effects associated
with the imagery intervention were observed attests to the general
effectiveness of the intervention regardless of imagery ability.
However, considering previous findings that imagery ability varies from
person to person, it seems plausible that an imagery intervention such
as the one employed in this study may be more effective for those with
greater imagery ability. Future research should aim to exami ne this
issue as well.
Although the conclusions drawn from this study are restricted due
to its experimental nature, implications of the results for sport
psychology practitioners may be important. Based on our findings, an
imagery script comprising both motivational general-arousal and
motivational general-mastery aspects would appear to be effective in
enabling participants to experience a more positive emotional state
(e.g., lower perceived stress) throughout a stressful situation (e.g.,
first climb). Numerous authors have recognized the potentially transient
nature of emotional states in physical activities (e.g., Krane et al.,
1994; Jones et al., 2000) and that emotion-focused research and
interventions must take this fact into consideration. All participants
in this study reported their highest levels of perceived stress at Stage
2 of the climb, which was 4.07 meters off the ground and followed a
traverse across the face of the wall. These findings clearly illustrated
the transient nature of emotional states in wall climbing. The fact that
participants in the experimental group experienced lower levels of
negative stress throughout the entire course of the climb provides
encouraging evidence with respect to the potential effectiveness of an
imagery script intervention during challenging physical activities.
The impact of the imagery intervention on self-efficacy levels also
have applied implications, particularly given the causal relationship
between self-efficacy and performance advanced by theory (Bandura, 1997)
and the positive association between self-efficacy and performance
demonstrated in sport settings (e.g., Treasure, Monson, & Lox, 1996;
Kane, Marks, Zaccaro, & Blair, 1996). For example, sport psychology
practitioners and athletes may consider using motivational
general-mastery imagery as an intervention to increase self-efficacy and
consequently improve performance in sports settings. While this
suggestion might seem to contradict our findings in that no difference
in skilled climbing performance levels were observed between the imagery
and control groups, such a result can be explained with reference to
self-efficacy theory. Specifically, higher levels of self-efficacy
should be more immediately associated with increases in persistence and
effort and not necessarily skilled performance. Therefore, it is likely
that performance benefits may be seen gradually overtime or should be
more clearly observed when viewed in comparison to one's previous
performances. Future research should examine the impact of imagery and
self-efficacy on intermediary mechanisms (i.e., effort, persistence)
proposed by theory as well as performance indicants.
Concluding Remarks
The results of the study are consistent with the propositions of
Martin et al.'s (1999) conceptual model and suggest that
motivational general-mastery and motivational general-arousal types of
imagery can be effective in enhancing self-efficacy as well as
controlling emotions during athletic activity. To enlarge on the
findings of this study future research may seek to determine whether
motivational general-mastery and motivational general-arousal types of
imagery can be used independently as interventions to facilitate
emotional control during athletic activity or whether a stronger effect
is observed when both are used jointly.
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New
York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Burhans Ill, R. S., Richman, C. L., & Bergey, D. B. (1988).
Mental imagery training: Effects on running speed performance.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 19, 26-37.
Butler, R. J. (1996). Sports psychology in action. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Callow, N., Hardy, L., & Hall, C. (1998). The effect of a
motivational-mastery imagery intervention on the sport confidence of
three elite badminton players. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 10,
S135.
Feltz, D. L., & Landers, D. M. (1983). The effects of mental
practice on motor skill learning and performance: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Sport Psychology, 5, 25-57.
Feltz, D. L. & Riessinger, C. A. (1990). Effects of in vivo emotive imagery and performance feedback on self-efficacy and muscular
endurance. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 12, 132-143.
Hall, C., Mack, D. E., Paivio, A., & Hausenblas, H. (1998).
Imagery use by athletes: development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 23, 1-17.
Hardy, L., & Callow, N. (1999). Efficacy of external and
internal visual imagery perspectives for the enhancement of performance
on tasks in which form is important. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 21, 95-112.
Hardy, L., Jones, G., & Gould, D. (1996). Understanding
psychological preparation for sport. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Jacobs, P. D., & Munz, D. C. (1968). An index for measuring
perceived stress in a college population. The Journal of Psychology 70,
9-15.
Jones, J. G. (1991). Recent developments and current issues in
competitive state anxiety research. The Psychologist, 4, 152-155.
Jones, M. V., Mace, R. D., & Williams, S. (2000). Relationship
between emotional state and performance during international field
hockey matches. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 90, 691-701.
Kane, T. D., Marks, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Blair, V. (1996).
Self-efficacy, personal goals, and wrestlers' self-regulation.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18, 36-48.
Krane, V., Joyce D., & Rafeld, J. (1994). Competitive anxiety,
situation criticality, and softball performance. The Sport Psychologist,
8, 58-72.
Lang, P. J. (1977). Imagery in therapy: An information-processing
analysis of fear. Behavior Therapy, 8, 862-886.
Lang, P. J. (1979). A bio-informational theory of emotional
imagery. Psychophysiology, 16, 495-512.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Lee, A. B., & Hewitt, J. (1987). Using visual imagery in a
flotation tank to improve gymnastic performance and reduce physical
symptoms. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 18, 223-230.
Lee, C. (1990). Psyching up for a muscular endurance task: Effects
of image content on performance and mood state. Journal of Sport and
Exercise Psychology 16, 66-73.
Mace, R. D. (1990). Cognitive behavioral interventions in sport. In
J. G. Jones & L. Hardy (Eds.), Stress and performance in sport (pp.
203-230). Chichester, England: Wiley.
Mace, R. (1994). With netball in mind. Division of Sport Science,
Crewe and Alsager Faculty, The Manchester Metropolitan University:
Delaware Press Ltd.
Mace, R. D. & Carroll, D. (1985). The control of anxiety in
sport: Stress Inoculation training prior to abseiling. International
Journal of Sport Psychology 16, 165-175.
Mace, R. D. & Carroll, D. (1989). The effect of stress
inoculation training on self-reported stress, observer's rating of
stress, heart rate and gymnastics performance. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 7, 257-266.
Martin, K. A., Moritz, S. E., & Hall, C. R. (1999). Imagery use
in sport: A literature review and applied model. The Sport Psychologist,
13, 245-268.
Maurer, T. J. & Pierce, H. R. (1998). A comparison of Likert
scale and traditional measures of self-efficacy. Journal of Applied
Psychology 83, 324-329.
Mudgett, B, & Quinones, M. (1997, April). Self-efficacy
beliefs: Comparison of two distinct measures. Paper presented at the
annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, St. Louis, MO.
Munroe, K. J., Giacobbi, P. R., Hall, C., Weinberg, R. (2000). The
four Ws of imagery use: Where, when, why, and what. The Sport
Psychologist, 14, 119 - 137.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill
Paivio, A. (1985). Cognitive and motivational functions of imagery
in human performance. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10,
22-28.
Richardson, A. (1969). Mental imagery. New York: Springer.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety
inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Treasure, D. C., Monson, J., & Lox, C. L. (1996). Relationship
between self-efficacy, wrestling performance, and affect prior to
competition. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 73-83.
Vadocz, E. A., Hall, C., & Moritz, S. E. (1997). The
relationship between competitive anxiety and imagery use. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 9,241-252.
Vealey, R. S., & Greenleaf, C. A. (1998). Seeing is believing:
Understanding and Using Imagery in Sport. In J. M. Williams (Ed.),
Applied Sport Psychology: Personal growth to peak performance, (23
7-269). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield (3rd Ed.).
Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall
job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82, 247-252.