Optimizing Bowling Performance

in Journal of Motor Learning and Development
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD  $41.00

1 year subscription

USD  $55.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD  $79.00

2 year subscription

USD  $103.00

The present study examined the influence on motor performance of key variables described in the OPTIMAL (Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning) theory of motor learning: enhanced expectancies for future performance, autonomy support, and an external focus. Participants performed a nine-pin bowling task. In the optimized group, enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and an external focus were implemented on three successive blocks of 12 trials. In the control group, participants performed all trials under “neutral” conditions. The optimized group outperformed the control group on all blocks. The findings corroborate the importance of key variables in the OPTIMAL theory by demonstrating immediate benefits of their implementation for motor performance.

Abdollahipour and Valtr are with the Department of Natural Sciences in Kinanthropology, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic. Wulf is with the Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA.

Abdollahipour (reza.abdollahipour@upol.cz) is corresponding author.
  • Abdollahipour, R., Palomo Nieto, M., Psotta, R., & Wulf, G. (2017). External focus of attention and autonomy support have additive benefits for motor performance in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 32, 1724. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2011). Feedback after good versus poor trials affects intrinsic motivation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 360364. PubMed ID: 21699117 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2012). Feedback about more accurate versus less accurate trials: Differential effects on self-confidence and activation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83, 196203. PubMed ID: 22808705

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Buckner, R.L., Andrews-Hanna, J.R., & Schacter, D.L. (2008). The brain’s default network: Anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 138. PubMed ID: 18400922 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chua, L., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2018). Onward and upward: Optimizing motor performance. Human Movement Science, 60, 107114. PubMed ID: 29859387 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Academic.

  • Cordova, D.I., & Lepper, M.R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715730. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49, 182185. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Di, X., & Biswal, B.B. (2015). Dynamic brain functional connectivity modulated by resting-state networks. Brain Structure and Function, 220, 3746. PubMed ID: 25713839 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G&Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175191. PubMed ID: 17695343 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gonçalves, G.S., Cardozo, P.L., Valentini, N.C., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2018). Enhancing performance expectancies through positive comparative feedback facilitates the learning of basketball free throw in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 36, 174177. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Halperin, I., Williams, K.J., Martin, D.T., & Chapman, D.W. (2016). The effects of attentional focusing instructions on force production during the isometric mid-thigh pull. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30, 919923. PubMed ID: 27003451 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hooyman, A. Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2014). Impacts of autonomy-supportive versus controlling instructional language on motor learning. Human Movement Science, 36, 190198. PubMed ID: 24861925 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Iwatsuki, T., Abdollahipour, R., Psotta, R., Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2017). Autonomy facilitates repeated maximum force productions. Human Movement Science, 55, 264268. PubMed ID: 28865313 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Iwatsuki, T., Navalta, J., & Wulf, G. (2019). Autonomy enhances running efficiency. Journal of Sports Sciences, 37(6), 685691. PubMed ID: 30326783 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Janelle, C.M., Barba, D.A., Frehlich, S.G., Tennant, L.K., & Cauraugh, J.H. (1997). Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 269279. PubMed ID: 9421839 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kuhn, Y.-A., Keller, M., Ruffieux, J., & Taube, W. (2017). Adopting an external focus of attention alters intracortical inhibition within the primary motor cortex. Acta Physiologica, 220, 289299. PubMed ID: 27653020 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. PubMed ID: 24324449 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lemos, A., Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2017). Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 31, 2834. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewthwaite, R., Chiviacowsky, S., Drews, R., & Wulf, G. (2015). Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 13831388. PubMed ID: 25732095 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2010). Grand challenge for movement science and sport psychology: Embracing the social-cognitive-affective-motor nature of motor behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 42. PubMed ID: 21833211 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2017). Optimizing motivation and attention for motor performance and learning. Current Opinion in Psychology, 16, 3842. PubMed ID: 28813352 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lohani, S., Martig, A.K., Underhill, S.M., DeFrancesco, A., Roberts, M.J., Rinaman, L., Amara, S., & Moghaddam, B. (2018). Burst activation of dopamine neurons produces prolonged post-burst availability of actively released dopamine. Neuropsychopharmacology, 43, 20832092. PubMed ID: 29795245 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marchant, D.C., Carnegie, E., Wood, G., & Ellison, P. (2018). Influence of visual illusion and attentional focusing instruction in motor performance. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKay, B., Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., & Nordin, A. (2015). The self: Your own worst enemy? A test of the self-invoking trigger hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 19101919. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Montes, J., Wulf, G., & Navalta, J.W. (2018). Maximal aerobic capacity can be increased by enhancing performers’ expectancies. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 58, 744749. PubMed ID: 28229577

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Palmer, K., Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2016). Enhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 229232. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pascua, L.A.M., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2015). Additive benefits of external focus and enhanced performance expectancy for motor learning. Journal of Sports Sciences, 33, 5866. PubMed ID: 24875153 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Post, P.G., Fairbrother, J.T., & Barros, J.A.C. (2011). Self-controlled amount of practice benefits learning of a motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 474481. PubMed ID: 21957706 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.M. (2011). Cortisol reactivity to a teacher’s motivating style: The biology of being controlled versus supporting autonomy. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 6374. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Saemi, E., Porter, J.M., Ghotbi-Varzaneh, A., Zarghami, M., & Maleki, F. (2012). Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13, 378382. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schmidt, R.A., Lee, T.D., Winstein, C.J., Wulf, G., & Zelaznik, H.N. (2019). Motor control and learning (6th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stoate, I., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012). Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30, 815823. PubMed ID: 22439657 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tafarodi, R.W., Milne, A.B., & Smith, A.J. (1999). The confidence of choice: Evidence for an augmentation effect on self-perceived performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 14051416. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wallace, H.M., Baumeister, R.F., & Vohs, K.D. (2005). Audience support and choking under pressure: A home disadvantage? Journal of Sports Sciences, 23, 429438. PubMed ID: 16089187 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wise, R.A. (2004). Dopamine, learning and motivation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 483494. PubMed ID: 15152198 doi:

  • World Ninepin Bowling Association. (2017). Technical regulations. Vienna, Austria: Author.

  • Wulf, G. (2013). Attentional focus and motor learning: A review of 15 years. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 6, 77104. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Cardozo, P. (2014). Additive benefits of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies for motor learning. Human Movement Science, 37, 1220. PubMed ID: 25046402 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Drews, R. (2015). External focus and autonomy support: Two important factors in motor learning have additive benefits. Human Movement Science, 40, 176184. PubMed ID: 25589021 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Höß, M., & Prinz, W. (1998). Instructions & for motor learning: Differential effects of internal versus external focus of attention. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 169179. PubMed ID: 20037032 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Iwatsuki, T., Machin, B., Kellogg, J., Copeland, C., & Lewthwaite, R. (2018). Lassoing skill through learner choice. Journal of Motor Behavior, 50, 285292. PubMed ID: 28854061 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2009). Conceptions of ability affect motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 41, 461467. PubMed ID: 19491058 doi:

  • Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 23, 13821414. PubMed ID: 26833314 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., Cardozo, P., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2018). Triple play: Additive contributions of enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and external attentional focus to motor learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 824831. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., McNevin, N., & Shea, C.H. (2001). The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 54, 11431154. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wulf, G., Raupach, M., & Pfeiffer, F. (2005). Self-controlled observational practice enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76, 107111. PubMed ID: 15810775 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 260 260 53
Full Text Views 10 10 2
PDF Downloads 3 3 1