Movement efficiency and motor control are fundamental aspects of athletic performance. As coaches, every day we have the chance to improve these qualities during training sessions. Coaching is context dependent and different tools can be used to achieve this goal, but verbal instructions can be considered the most common one. But how do verbal cueing work? Which kind of cues are more appropriate in specific contexts? This article reviews the current literature on how different types of verbal cues may enhance motor learning at different levels. KEYWORDS: attentional focus, coaching cue, motor learning
Motor control can be defined as the process of initiating, directing, and grading purposeful voluntary movement. [1] Shumway-Cook has defined motor control as the ability to regulate mechanisms essential to movement. [2] Motor control is complex, it has been addressed from different fields of study including neuroscience, biomechanics, cognitive science, and psychology. Athletes can improve their motor control with the process of motor learning, that has been defined as “a set of internal processes associated with practice or experience leading to relatively permanent changes in the capability for skilled behavior”. [3] Cano-de-la-Cuerda et al. [4] outlined the factors that affect motor learning: verbal instructions, practice, active participation and motivation, possibility of errors, memory, and feedback. Verbal instructions are key-components of motor learning. The term “attentional focus” can be found within the motor-learning literature to describe the focus adopted by an individual while performing a motor skill. This focus can be supported by a coaching cue oriented to an increase of the conscious effort of the participant to focus the attention on specific thoughts or feelings. Literature splits attentional focus into two categories: external and internal. With internal-focus cues coaches can encourage individuals to focus on their body (such as muscles and joints), on the other side with external-focus cues coaches can encourage to focus on the environment (e.g., “push the ground away”) or the associated movement outcome (e.g., “sprint through the line”). [5] Cueing an athlete can be extremely beneficial or extremely harmful with regards to motor learning efficiency, evidence shows that some cues may be more appropriate than others in given contexts.
| Activity | Internal cue | External cue |
| Running (acceleration phase) | “Extend the hip” | “Push the floor behind you” |
| Reactive jumps | “Focus on minimize ground contact time” | “Imagine that the floor is really hot and touch the ceiling” |
| Topspin in tennis | “Rotate your wrist at the impact with the ball” | “Cover the top of the ball with the racket” |
| Running (max velocity phase) | “Flex and extend the hip to create a circular motion” | “Think about spinning the Earth with your feet” |
| Posture | “Retract and depress shoulder blades” | “Stand tall” |
THE ROLE OF EXTERNAL CUES
Literature reveals that the vast majority of cues should be external when attempting to improve both movement efficiency and effectiveness. Different studies analyzed movement quality when external and internal cues were given by instructors, and most of them noticed more beneficial effects of external cues over the internal ones. [6] External attentional focus seems to enhance performance of both individual and team sports.
Soccer: Ford et al. [7] demonstrated that focusing on the ball is more effective than focusing on the body while evaluating the end-point trajectory plan during a kicking action.
Swim: Studies suggest that both intermediate and professional swimmers would benefit from an external attentional focus rather than focusing on body parts. External cues such as “push the water back/down” can have a positive impact on swimming speed. [8,9]
Classical ballet: A study from Guss-West and Wulf [10] assumed that despite of the fact that most professional dancers focus on internal features, dance performers should adopt external attentional focus during training sessions.
Boxe: In the course of Australian Boxing Championships, the feedbacks given by coaches were recorded and transcribed. Results showed that during winning bouts coaches delivered less internal cues when compared with losing bouts. [11]
Baseball: Gray [12] compared the two types of cueing to determine which of them could be more beneficial in order to increase lunch angle in baseball batting. Higher launch angle, higher exit velocity, more fly balls, and more home runs were noticed in external focus group over the internal one.
Weightlifting: A study from Schutts et al. [13] recommended coaches to direct an athlete’s attention externally, toward the movement outcome, rather than the action itself.
Basketball: It has been demonstrated that during basketball free throw performance, when external cues were given, an external attentional focus on movement effects was more effective than an external attentional focus on movement dynamics (form). [14]
Golf: 39 skilled male golfers were examined during golf performance. Findings revealed the importance of adopting an external focus instead of focusing on internal factors during both neutral and anxiety conditions of golf practice. [15]
Jump performance: Studies demonstrated that providing instructions that focus externally enhances standing long jump performance and projection angle compared with instructions that focus attention internally. [16,17]
THE ROLE OF INTERNAL CUES
Even if literature suggests that in most of the cases coaches should adopt external cues when attempting to improve movement quality to subsequently obtain performance enhancement, it seems that internal cues may have a positive impact when trying to achieve specific goals. Catalyud et al. [18] recorded surface EMG during bench press, and they noticed a significant difference of muscle activity (pectoralis major and triceps brachii) between individuals who focused on muscles versus individuals who performed the exercises without specific attentional focuses. These results were constant only at specific intensities (between 60% and 80% of 1RM) The same authors also conducted another study [19], which it revealed that focusing on single muscles during bench press activity can increase amplitude of EMG activity. However, these results were noticed only under controlled speed conditions and not during explosive speed conditions. Schoenfeld and Contreas [20] analyzed different studies in which it emerged the effectiveness of internal attentional focus during muscular development activities. Bodybuilders, physique athletes and others seeking maximal hypertrophy would benefit by focusing on the target muscle during an exercise rather than on the outcome or environment. This strategy seems to be effective when training with relatively light loads and not with higher loads (above 85%1RM).
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COACHES
Evidence strongly supports the adoption of external cues rather than internal cues in most of sport activities. The increased muscular efficiency and accuracy of force production with an external attentional focus over no specific focus or internal focus suggests that coaches should adopt external cueing during both practice and competition.External attentional focus enhances speed, power, strength, and movement accuracy. All of these factors have an extremely important role in terms of sport performance. [22] When attempting to develop muscular hypertrophy internal cues seem to have a positive impact on the desired outcome, personal trainers should promote internal attentional focus when training people with relatively light loads (60%-85% of 1RM). Despite of what evidence suggests, there are still coaches who are trying to promote movement efficiency with internal cues. In fact, the study of Guss-West and Wulf [10] demonstrates that professional ballet dancers focus on internal features or on a combination of internal-external. Also in the track and field world this phenomenon seems constant: 69% of participants competing at the USA Track and Field Outdoor National Championships reported that coaches utilize internal focus cues 69% of the time during competition and 84,6% during practice. [21] This suggest that there is a room for improvement for performance and teaching. Coaching education should be directed toward bridging the gap between science anD practice.