Search

Abstract Numerous efforts have been made to test the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in healthy children and adult populations. However, only a small number of studies have tested this theory in children with cognitive-motor disorders, such as developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The present study aims to examine the individual and additive effects of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on a golf putting task in children at risk for DCD based on the OPTIMAL theory. Forty children at risk for DCD (mean age = 8.57 ± 1.05 years) were randomly assigned to four experimental groups (1—small visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 2—big visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 3—small visual illusion + yoked; 4—big visual illusion + yoked). Following 12 pretest trials of a golf putting task, the participants completed 5 blocks of 12 trials of practice on the first day. A retention test (12 trials) and a transfer dual-task test (12 trials) were conducted on the second day. The results indicated that in retention test the big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group was significantly better than the small visual illusion + yoked group (p = 0.01), while there was not any other significant difference between groups at retention test as well as between all groups at practice phase and transfer test (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). In other words, an additive effect has been observed just in the retention test but not the practice phase as well as transfer test. In general, the results of this study support the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in children at risk for DCD and suggests to all educators who work with these children to use the combination of the visual illusion with self-controlled practice to improve the motor learning of children at risk for DCD.

Numerous efforts have been made to test the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in healthy children and adult populations. However, only a small number of studies have tested this theory in children with cognitive-motor disorders, such as developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The present study aims to examine the individual and additive effects of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on a golf putting task in children at risk for DCD based on the OPTIMAL theory. Forty children at risk for DCD (mean age = 8.57 ± 1.05 years) were randomly assigned to four experimental groups (1—small visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 2—big visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 3—small visual illusion + yoked; 4—big visual illusion + yoked). Following 12 pretest trials of a golf putting task, the participants completed 5 blocks of 12 trials of practice on the first day. A retention test (12 trials) and a transfer dual-task test (12 trials) were conducted on the second day. The results indicated that in retention test the big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group was significantly better than the small visual illusion + yoked group (p = 0.01), while there was not any other significant difference between groups at retention test as well as between all groups at practice phase and transfer test (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). In other words, an additive effect has been observed just in the retention test but not the practice phase as well as transfer test. In general, the results of this study support the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in children at risk for DCD and suggests to all educators who work with these children to use the combination of the visual illusion with self-controlled practice to improve the motor learning of children at risk for DCD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives According to the Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) theory of Wulf and Lewthwaite, enhanced expectancies (EE), autonomy support (AS), and an external focus (EF) of attention facilitate motor performance and learning. The present study examined whether consecutive implementation of EE, AS, and EF during practice would enhance the learning of a square-stepping task in older adults. Methods Participants were randomly assigned to optimized and control groups. After the pretest, 1 of the 3 factors was implemented during each of the three 12-trial practice blocks, in a counterbalanced order, in the optimized group: positive feedback (EE), choice of mat color (AS), and instructions to focus on the squares (EF). Control group participants practiced without any of these factors. Results Results indicated that the optimized group had faster movement times than the control group during the practice phase and on 24-hr retention and transfer tests. Discussion The key variables in the OPTIMAL theory can be applied sequentially in order to facilitate motor performance and learning in older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An external focus of attention, enhanced expectancies, and autonomy support (i.e., OPTIMAL factors) are key factors to optimise motor performance and uncover latent movement capabilities. However, research on the combination of OPTIMAL factors, particularly in children's dynamic movement settings is limited. Therefore, this study examined the combined effects of OPTIMAL factors on children's performance on a dynamic movement assessment battery, hypothesising higher performance scores in the optimised version of the assessment battery versus standardised version of the assessment. Forty-nine children (15 boys, 34 girls; mean age 10.61 ± 1.38 years) completed the Dragon Challenge (DC) dynamic movement assessment battery. Performance was measured via a summation of movement process (technique), outcome, and time-to-completion scores (max score N = 54) with higher scores representing better performance. Participants completed a standardised and an optimised version of the DC in a counterbalanced fashion. For the latter, DC protocols were optimised via the provision of choice (autonomy support); external focus instructions augmented by simple knowledge statement, positive feedback and promotion of a growth mindset (Enhanced expectancies). Results indicate that motor performance (DC score) was better in the optimised (M = 31.08 ± 6.66) vs. standardised (M = 29.04 ± 5.88). The findings indicate that the combination of OPTIMAL factors can improve children's motor performance in dynamic movement settings and that standardised motor assessment may not reveal children's true movement capabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Positive social comparative feedback indicates to the learner that they are performing better than others. While this type feedback supports motor skill learning in some tasks, the effect of social comparative feedback on implicit motor sequence learning remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of positive social comparative feedback on the learning of and expectancies for a motor sequence task. Methods: Forty-eight individuals practiced a joystick-based sequence task and were divided into three feedback groups: CONTROL (no performance feedback), RT ONLY (response time only feedback), and RT+POS (response time plus positive social comparison). Participants attended sessions on two consecutive days: Day 1 for repetitive motor practice/skill acquisition and Day 2 for retention testing. Performance related expectancies, like perceived competence, were measured before and after motor practice on Day 1 and at retention on Day 2. Results: While all groups improved with practice, the CONTROL group showed better overall performance/learning (faster response times) compared with the RT ONLY group. Despite similar response times, the RT+POS showed higher peak velocities than the RT ONLY group. Overall, the RT+POS and CONTROL demonstrated increases in perceived competence while the RT ONLY group did not. Discussion: The results of this study suggest that feedback content is an important consideration during motor practice sessions since feedback without context (RT ONLY) may be detrimental to motor sequence learning. The results also suggest that, if providing performance related feedback during practice of a skill that relies on implicit sequence learning processes, comparative context may be necessary for enhancing expectancies and supporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionPositive social comparative feedback indicates to the learner that they are performing better than others. While this type feedback supports motor skill learning in some tasks, the effect of social comparative feedback on implicit motor sequence learning remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of positive social comparative feedback on the learning of and expectancies for a motor sequence task.MethodsForty-eight individuals practiced a joystick-based sequence task and were divided into three feedback groups: CONTROL (no performance feedback), RT ONLY (response time only feedback), and RT+POS (response time plus positive social comparison). Participants attended sessions on two consecutive days: Day 1 for repetitive motor practice/skill acquisition and Day 2 for retention testing. Performance related expectancies, like perceived competence, were measured before and after motor practice on Day 1 and at retention on Day 2.ResultsWhile all groups improved with practice, the CONTROL group showed better overall performance/learning (faster response times) compared with the RT ONLY group. Despite similar response times, the RT+POS showed higher peak velocities than the RT ONLY group. Overall, the RT+POS and CONTROL demonstrated increases in perceived competence while the RT ONLY group did not.DiscussionThe results of this study suggest that feedback content is an important consideration during motor practice sessions since feedback without context (RT ONLY) may be detrimental to motor sequence learning. The results also suggest that, if providing performance related feedback during practice of a skill that relies on implicit sequence learning processes, comparative context may be necessary for enhancing expectancies and supporting.

The present study was designed to investigate the effects of positive social-comparative feedback on motor learning and self-efficacy of a throwing motor skill in individuals with ADHD. The subjects were 44 adolescents with ADHD in the age range of 15 to 18 years old and were randomly and equally divided into two groups: positive social-comparative feedback and control group. Motor task consisted of throwing bean bags with the non-dominant arm at a target on the ground. The participants completed the pretest (10 trials), an acquisition phase including 6 blocks of 10 trials, and a retention test consisting of 10 trials. The participants in the positive social comparison feedback group were informed that their throws on the previous block were, on average, better than the throws of the other participants in this group. Prior to pretest, each block, and before the retention test, all participants completed the self-efficacy scale. Dependent measures were throwing accuracy scores and self-efficacy. Independent t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures were employed to analyze the data. Positive social comparison feedback group throwed the bean bags significantly better in the acquisition phase and the retention test compared to the control group. In addition, positive social comparison feedback group reported significantly higher self-efficacy scores in the acquisition phase and the retention test in comparison to the control group. Our findings indicated that enhanced expectancies benefited individuals with ADHD to enhance their performance and learn a novel motor skill

Motivation is commonly recognized by researchers and practitioners as a key factor for motor learning. The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) claims that practice conditions that enhance learners' expectancies for future successful outcomes or that are autonomy supportive are motivating, thus leading to better learning. To examine the current evidence of the association between motivation and motor learning, we searched the literature for studies that manipulated expectancies and/or autonomy support. Specifically, our goals were to assess whether these manipulations resulted in group differences in motivation and, if so, whether increased motivation was associated with learning advantages. Results showed that out of 166 experiments, only 21% (n = 35) included at least one measure of motivation, even though this is the main factor proposed by OPTIMAL theory to explain the learning benefits of these manipulations. Among those, only 23% (n = 8) found group-level effects on motivation, suggesting that these manipulations might not be as motivating as expected. Of the eight experiments that found a group-level effect on motivation, five also observed learning benefits, offering limited evidence that when practice conditions increase motivation, learning is more likely to occur. Overall, the small number of studies assessing motivation precludes any reliable conclusions on the association between motivation and motor learning from being drawn. Together, our results question whether manipulations implemented in the research lines supporting OPTIMAL theory are indeed motivating and highlight the lack of sufficient evidence in these literatures to support that increased motivation benefits motor learning. • Studies under OPTIMAL theory's motivational branch often do not measure motivation. • Autonomy support and enhanced expectancies may not be as motivating as expected. • There is limited evidence that increased motivation benefits motor learning. • Other mechanisms might underlie autonomy support/enhanced expectancies benefits. • Researchers should amplify their efforts to investigate mechanisms of interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expectancies for success and autonomy support have been shown to facilitate motor learning and enhance motor performance. The purpose of the study was to examine whether we replicated (a) enhanced expectancies and autonomy support intervention enhanced motor skill learning in children, and (b) identified the underlying psychological mechanism. Sixty children kicked soccer balls with their dominant leg to a squared area target. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four groups: enhanced expectancies and autonomy support (EE/AS), enhanced expectancies (EE), autonomy support (AS), or control (CON) groups. Participants learning the skill were or were not provided enhanced expectation instructions by making the task success easier and provided an opportunity to choose one of the three colored balls during their practice. Two days later, they performed retention and transfer tests. Results indicated that the EE/AS group had the highest scores, with main effects of autonomy support being significant and enhanced expectancies being marginally significant for the retention test and significant for the transfer test. The EE/AS group had the highest self-efficacy and perceived choice scores. Therefore, having high expectancies for success and being autonomous were important ingredients for facilitating motor skill learning in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Skilled motor performance is essential in sports, the performing arts, various occupations, and many daily activities. Scientists and practitioners alike are therefore interested in understanding the conditions that influence the performance and learning of movement skills, and how they can be utilized to optimize training. In OPTIMAL theory, three motivational and attentional factors are key: enhanced expectancies for future performance, the performer's autonomy, and an external focus of attention. We review recent evidence suggesting that each factor contributes independently to strengthen the coupling of goals to actions. This work has implications ranging from fostering more effective skill development in novice learners, to increasing the efficiency of athletes' and musicians' performance, and to facilitating the success of patients in regaining functional capabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current study, we implemented the three key factors (i.e., enhanced expectancies [EE], autonomy support [AS], and external focus [EF]) of the OPTIMAL theory [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(5), 1382–1414. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9]. Following the findings in an earlier study that the simultaneous use of EE, AS, and EF during practice resulted in learning advantages, we explored whether the implementation of EE, AS, and EF in a consecutive manner during practice would be beneficial for the learning of golf putting. Optimised and control groups first completed a pre-test under neutral conditions. Optimised group participants were then provided a different condition for each of three acquisition blocks in a counterbalanced order: (a) positive feedback (EE); (b) choice of golf ball colour (AS); and (c) instructions to focus on a pendulum-like swing motion (EF). Control group participants practised under neutral conditions. The optimised group outperformed the control group during practice and on a delayed retention test, as measured by accuracy score and number of successful putts. Additionally, optimised group participants reported higher levels of confidence and positive affect after practice, and they were more confident prior to the retention test, as compared to control group participants. Our findings indicate that the key motivational (EE and AS) and attentional (EF) factors of the OPTIMAL theory can be applied individually in a sequential fashion, and in any order, throughout practice to benefit skill learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An external focus of attention, enhanced expectancies and autonomy support are key independent and interactive characteristics which enhance motor learning. These OPTIMAL (Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning) characteristics have proven supportive of adult's motor learning yet, their effect on children's motor learning is comparatively under-explored. Fifty-five studies were systematically reviewed to outline the impact of OPTIMAL variables on children's motor learning, specifically foundational movement skills (FMS). Thirty-five studies examined an external focus of attention, whereas relatively few addressed enhanced expectancies (n = 12) and autonomy support (n = 8). Only 2 explored the interaction between OPTIMAL variables. Results show emerging evidence that OPTIMAL variables contribute to children's effective motor learning. Despite this initial support, there is a paucity of research regarding the impact of OPTIMAL variables across the full FMS range (i.e. a skewness towards object manipulation skills). Moreover, children's different developmental characteristics may moderate the beneficial effects of OPTIMAL variables. Additionally, the attentional and motivational mechanisms underpinning OPTIMAL learning (e.g. self-efficacy) in children requires future work. Finally, there is a need for future combinatory research addressing OPTIMAL variables in children (e.g. enhanced expectancies with autonomy support). The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed throughout. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning postulates that autonomy support (AS), enhanced expectancies (EE), and an external focus of attention (EF) facilitate improved motor learning and performance. However, its applicability to elite-level throwing athletes has not been investigated by previous literature. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the successive implementation of AS, EE, and EF factors on overhand throwing performance in elite collegiate softball athletes (14.44 ± 2.75 years of softball experience). The secondary purpose was to determine whether self-efficacy beliefs would be augmented by factor manipulation. Twenty-four participants threw softballs at a bullseye target during five blocks. The Baseline test (Block 1) was used to subsequently assign participants to either the OPTIMAL or control group. Three middle blocks (Block 2 to 4) followed with successive factor implementation for the OPTIMAL group and without instruction for the control group. The final block (Block 5) served as the Transfer test, at which time throwing distance was increased. During Blocks 2 to 4, the OPTIMAL group was given the choice between softballs (AS), a liberal definition of successful throwing performance (EE), and instructed to focus on the bullseye (EF). Self-efficacy beliefs were assessed after applying the factors and before all blocks. There were no significant differences between the groups in throwing accuracy or self-efficacy scores across all blocks. The results suggest that the OPTIMAL theory does not augment skilled throwing performance or alter self-efficacy in elite softball throwing, potentially attributed to a natural adoption of EF and previously high self-efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Resting state functional brain connectivity was measured before and after motor practice. • Expectancy-enhancing feedback during practice is thought to engage dopaminergic pathways. • Positive feedback during motor practice increased dopaminergic neural pathway connectivity. • The positive social comparative feedback was not sufficient to drive the expected behavioral effects. Positive social comparative feedback is hypothesized to generate a dopamine response in the brain, similar to reward, by enhancing expectancies to support motor skill learning. However, no studies have utilized neuroimaging to examine this hypothesized dopaminergic mechanism. Therefore, the aim of this preliminary study was to investigate the effect of positive social comparative feedback on dopaminergic neural pathways measured by resting state connectivity. Thirty individuals practiced an implicit, motor sequence learning task and were assigned to groups that differed in feedback type. One group received feedback about their actual response time to complete the task (RT ONLY), while the other group received feedback about their response time with positive social comparison (RT + POS). Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired at the beginning and end of repetitive motor practice with feedback to measure practice-dependent changes in resting state brain connectivity. While both groups showed improvements in task performance and increases in performance expectancies, ventral tegmental area and the left nucleus accumbens (mesolimbic dopamine pathway) resting state connectivity increased in the RT + POS group but not in the RT ONLY group. Instead, the RT ONLY group showed increased connectivity between ventral tegmental area and primary motor cortex. Positive social comparative feedback during practice of a motor sequence task may induce a dopaminergic response in the brain along the mesolimbic pathway. However, given that absence of effects on expectancies and motor learning, more robust and individualized approaches may be needed to provide beneficial psychological and behavioral effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies have shown that feedback indicating good performance facilitates motor skill learning. The present study examined whether enhancing learners' expectancies through simple encouraging feedback would boost motivation and learning. Adolescent participants performed a linear positioning task. The goal was to move a slide to a target 60 cm to the right and include a reversal movement on the way. Veridical feedback related to spatial accuracy was provided to all participants after each of eight 10-trial practice blocks. An enhanced expectancy (EE) group was given an additional positive feedback statement after each practice block, while a control group received no such feedback. Retention (60 cm target distance) and transfer (45 cm) tests were performed without feedback on the following day. The EE group demonstrated greater movement accuracy than the control group on both tests. Moreover, self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and interest in continued practice were significantly higher for the EE group after practice and before retention testing. The findings demonstrate that, in line with OPTIMAL theory (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) predictions, enhancing learners' expectancies by providing positive feedback resulted in benefits for intrinsic motivation and skill learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (an external attentional focus, EF) factors that affect motor performance and learning [1]. One implication of this theory is that standardized clinical and laboratory assessments of physical capacity and motor performance that do not incorporate optimizing conditions may underestimate true maximal capabilities. The influence of "optimized" conditions on a clinical-applied test of balance control was examined with healthy participants. Given the motor performance benefits of optimized conditions predicted by the OPTIMAL theory, it was hypothesized that providing participants with information that induced EE, provided them with AS, and promoted their use of EF would reduce balance errors and postural sway.Methods: We used as an exemplar assessment, the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), and center-of-pressure (COP) velocity measurements of postural sway. Participants performed under two different conditions, separated by two days: an optimized (EE, AS, and EF) condition and a control ("neutral") condition, with sample-wide order counterbalancing. In each condition, participants performed three stances (double-leg, single-leg, and tandem) on two support surfaces (firm and foam). Stance order was participant-determined in the optimized condition and, for the control condition, yoked to a participant in the optimized condition.Results: Participants committed fewer balance errors in the optimized condition than in the control condition (p < .001) and their resultant COP velocity in the optimized condition was lower than that in the control condition (p = .004). BESS scores were correlated with resultant COP velocity (r = .593, p < .001).Significance: Our results demonstrated the impact of implementing optimized, as opposed to "neutral" control, conditions for better insight into balance capabilities in normal and challenging situations. Practitioners' roles in mediating test situations and using subtle wording to promote optimized performance may have consequential impacts on motor assessment outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that enhanced expectancies can foster a person's motivational state and facilitate motor learning. However, the effects of enhanced expectancies on motivational state and subsequent motor learning in individuals with varied motivational states (e.g., self-efficacy; SE) are not well understood. This study examined the effects of enhanced expectancies on motivational state and motor learning in individuals with high and low SE by manipulating the type of knowledge of results (KR). We selected 60 participants from 251 male undergraduate students, based on their SE level, and assigned them to four groups: (a) Good Performance KR and High SE, (b) Poor Performance KR and High SE, (c) Good Performance KR and Low SE, and (d) Poor Performance KR and Low SE. We asked participants to throw beanbags at a target with their nondominant hand during an acquisition phase (10 blocks of six trials each) and during subsequent retention and transfer tests. During acquisition, the Good KR groups received KR from their three most accurate trials in each training block, whereas the Poor KR groups received KR from their three poorest attempts in each block. We measured accuracy scores and changes in SE as dependent variables. Results showed that KR from good trials, relative to KR from poor trials, led to better accuracy scores during acquisition and retention and transfer tests, independent of participants' initial SE levels. Moreover, KR on good trials enhanced SE in the Good KR and Low SE group and kept SE at a high level in the Good KR and High SE group during acquisition and on the retention and transfer tests. These results provide support for the OPTIMAL (optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning) theory of motor learning, and we discuss results in terms of the potential effects of positive feedback on motor performance in professional athletes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examined the individual and combined influences of two factors that have been shown to benefit motor performance: an external focus of attention and the visual context of a target being aimed for. In a within-subjects design participants completed golf putts using control (C), internal (IN) and external (EX) attentional focus (AF) instructions under target-based visual illusion (perceptually larger (PLT) versus smaller (PST) targets) conditions. Twenty-six novice golfers completed six putts in each counterbalanced condition. Mean radial accuracy (cm) was calculated. Through the use of surrounding distracting visual stimulus, an Ebbinghaus illusion aimed to induce PLT or PST during putting. Verbal instruction directed attention to C (no specific focus), IN (arm movements) or EX (movement effect focus) focuses prior to execution. The Ebbinghaus illusions significantly altered perceived target size. Significant main effects indicated: (1) greater accuracy in EX (PLT: 27.32 vs. PST 31.46 cm) vs. IF (30.50 vs. 39.82 cm) and C (32.11 vs. 36.97 cm); (2) accuracy was benefited when putting towards the PLT vs. PST. No AF × Illusion interaction was evident. Performance was independently affected by AF and target visual context (e.g. perceived target size), suggesting different mechanisms in motor execution: instructions influence the control of movement whereas the target conditions inform motor planning through perceptual and motivational variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined how providing different criteria for success affected perceived expectations of success, performance, and learning in a golf-putting task. Twenty-nine physical education students were divided into three experimental groups: (a) a large-circle (LC) group that practiced 10 blocks of five putts, each with a 40 cm diameter circle around the target; (b) a small circle (SC) group that practiced with a 10 cm diameter circle around the target; and (c) a control (C) group that practiced with a 25 cm diameter circle around the target. Forty-eight hours after practice, the participants performed a retention test and a transfer test with a 25 cm diameter circle. The transfer test included putting from a greater distance and from a different angle. Throughout the study, we asked the participants to tell us what they think their chances are to land 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 balls out of 5 possible balls in each block. There were four main findings: (a) the SC group had lower expectancies of success compared with the LC and C groups in acquisition; (b) there were no group differences in performance or learning among groups; (c) golf club kinematic parameters worsened in the transfer test; and (d) the LC group reduced their expectancies of success from the retention to the transfer test, but the expectancies of the SC and C groups remained the same. We conclude that changes in success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not affect actual putting performance or learning. • Changing success criteria leads to changes in expectancies of success. • Enhanced expectancies of success do not lead to improved golf putting performance. • Difficult success criteria may lead to lower or cautious expectations of success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies several motivational and attentional factors that draw out latent motor performance capabilities. One implication of the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) is that standardized motor performance assessments likely do not reflect maximal capabilities unless they are "optimized" with appropriate testing conditions. The present study examined the effects of three key motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (external focus, EF) variables in the OPTIMAL theory on maximum force production. In Experiment 1, a handgrip strength task was used. EE, AS, and EF were implemented, in a counterbalanced order, on consecutive trial blocks in an optimized group. A control group performed all blocks under neutral conditions. While there were no group differences on Block 1 (baseline), the optimized group outperformed the control group on all other blocks. In Experiment 2, participants performed two one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat lift tests, separated by one week. Two groups, an optimized group and control group, had similar 1-RM values on the first test performed under neutral conditions. However, on the second test, a group performing under optimized conditions (EE, AS, EF) showed an increase in 1-RM, while there was no change from the first to the second test for a control group. We argue that standard test conditions may not produce true maximal performance. The findings corroborate the importance of key factors in the OPTIMAL theory and should be applied to ensure accurate strength performance assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning contends that an external focus of attention (EF), enhanced expectancies (EE), and autonomy support (AS) are key attentional and motivational variables that optimise motor performance. We examined how integrating an EF into EE and AS interventions would impact young adolescents' standing long jump performance and self-efficacy, perceived competence, task effort, task importance and positive affect. Forty-eight participants completed 3 jumps in a baseline, EF (focus on jumping towards the cone), EE-EF (positive social-comparative feedback/high success probability) and AS-EF (self-definition of success) conditions. Both the EF and AS-EF conditions (but not the EE-EF condition) improved jump performance from baseline. The EF, EE-EF and AS-EF conditions improved young adolescents' self-efficacy, perceived competence, task effort and positive affect in comparison to baseline and were predictors of jump performance (as was task importance). However, in the EE-EF condition motivational states improved (from baseline) but this did not translate into performance improvements. The findings show that directing attention to visual external cues both independently and when framed within AS conditions enhanced young adolescents' jump performance and motivation through efficient goal-action coupling. In practice, PE teachers and sports coaches working with young adolescents can support autonomy by allowing self-definition of success using an external cue to enhance effective goal-action coupling, motor performance and motivation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. This research did not revive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors., (Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)