The Influence of Attentional Focus on the Self-Efficacy-Performance Relationship in a Continuous Running Task

The self-efficacy-performance relationship in continuous sport tasks has been shown to be significantly reciprocal yet unequal with stronger influences in the performance-to-self-efficacy pathway rather than self-efficacy-to-performance pathway (e.g., LaForge-MacKenzie & Sullivan, 2014b). Bandura (2012) suggested that sociocognitive variables may influence this relationship. Attention as a sociocognitve factor may bias the processing of performance and self-efficacy information (Bandura, 1982, 1997; Bandura & Jourden, 1991). As confidence and attention are important aspects of peak running performance (Brewer, Van Raalte, Linder, & VanRaalte, 1991), the primary purpose of the present study was to examine the self-efficacy-performance relationship under three conditions of attentional focus. The secondary purpose was to examine self-efficacy and performance as separate constructs under the same conditions of attention. Participants ran continuously for one kilometer in one of three randomly assigned attentional focus conditions: internal-focus (n = 51), external-focus (n = 50), and control (n = 49). Self-efficacy was assessed using a one-item measure every 200 meters. Path analyses examining the primary objective revealed significant self-efficacy-to-performance pathways in all conditions: external-focus (p < .05, βs ranging from -.17 to -.32), internal-focus (p < .05, βs ranging from -.26 to -.36), and control (p < .05, βs ranging from -.29 to -.42). Significant reciprocal relationships were absent in all conditions. ANOVAs examining the secondary objectives found significantly faster performance in the control condition at the start (F (2, 147) = 3.86, p < .05) and end of the task (F (2, 147) = 3.56, p < .05). Self-efficacy was significantly higher in the internal-focus condition at the end of the task (Self-Efficacy 4 (F (2, 147) = 3.21, p < .05) and Self-Efficacy 5 (F (2, 147) = 4.74, p < .05). In contrast to previous within-trial research (e.g., LaForge-MacKenzie & Sullivan, 2014b) self-efficacy-to-performance effects were more significant and robust than performance-to-self-efficacy effects. These results provided support for Bandura’s (2012) suggestion that sociocognitive factors may have the ability to alter the causal structure of the self-efficacy-performance relationship, proposing complexities in the self-efficacy-performance relationship (Sitzmann &Yeo, 2013). Results were discussed from both theoretical and applied perspectives.

The Impact of Personal Trainer’s Leadership Style on Self-Presentational Concerns, Enjoyment, Task Self-Efficacy and Intention to Exercise in an Introductory Weight Training Orientation

The purpose of the present study was to examine two leadership styles of personal trainers (bland versus enriched) to evaluate their effects on exercise-related outcomes. Participants were 103 university women with no previous experience weight training. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two leadership style conditions. They completed primary measures prior to being introduced to the personal trainer. Next, participants completed an introductory weight training session, followed by post-manipulation measures. The leadership styles were successfully manipulated. Participants in the enriched leadership style condition reported significantly higher levels of enjoyment and intention to exercise. Participants in the bland leadership style condition reported significantly higher levels of social anxiety; no differences were found for task self-efficacy, self-presentational efficacy, social physique anxiety, or handgrip performance between groups. Thus, an enriched leadership style of personal trainers can increase positive psychological outcomes.

Examining peer-controlled KR schedules during the learning of a movement-timing task as a function of task experience.

Learners can be provided with feedback in the form of knowledge of results (KR), under self-controlled and peer-controlled schedules. Recently, McRae, Hansen, and Patterson (2015), identified that inexperienced peers can provide KR that can facilitate motor skill acquisition. However, it is currently unknown whether previous task experience differentially impacts how peers present learners with KR and whether this KR impacts motor skill acquisition. In the present study, participants were randomly assigned to become inexperienced peer facilitators, learners with an inexperienced peer, learners with self-control who later became experienced peers, learners with an experienced peer, or learners in a control group. During acquisition learners completed a serial-timing task with a goal of 2500ms and returned approximately twenty four hours later for a delayed retention, time transfer, and pattern transfer test. We predicted that during the delayed tests, learners with self-control would outperform all other groups. Furthermore, we predicted that learners who received KR from experienced peers would outperform learners who received KR from inexperienced peers. However, our results indicated that participants who received peer-controlled and self-controlled KR schedules learned the task in an equivalent manner. Thus, our results are novel as they identify that inexperienced peers can provide KR that is as effective as KR provided by experienced peers and KR requested under self-controlled conditions.