Liwei Zhang

Current research uses the 6-factor model, which includes motivation (enthusiasm for sport), confidence (belief in performance), concentration (focused attention), vigour (perceived vitality), tirelessness (lack of vitality), and calmness (absence of anxiety), 18-item Athletic Mental Energy Scale (AMES, Lu et al., 2018) to examine its influence on athletes’ cognition, behaviour, and emotion. However, two factors (i.e., vigour and tirelessness) in AMES are conceptually redundant and overlapping. We aimed to revise the AMES to improve its brevity. In Study 1, a 5-factor AMES (i.e., vigour, motivation, confidence, concentration, and calmness) was tested and analysed. In Study 2, we tested the gender invariance of the 5-factor AMES and examined nomological validity. In Study 3, we examined the test-retest reliability of the 5-factor AMES. Across these phases, the results showed that the 5-factor, 10-item AMES had an adequate factor structure, construct validity, reliability, and gender invariance. Future studies may utilise the 5-factor, 10-item AMES to examine its influence on athletes’ psychological and physical responses in field or laboratory settings. We further recommend that sports psychologists adopt the 5-factor, 10-item AMES.

Sprinting is often seen in a variety of sports. Focusing one’s attention externally before sprinting has been demonstrated to boost sprint performance. The present study aimed to systematically review previous findings on the impact of external focus (EF), in comparison to internal focus (IF), on sprint performance. A literature search was conducted in five electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science). A random-effects model was used to pool Hedge’s g with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The meta-analysis included six studies with a total of 10 effect sizes and 166 participants. In general, the EF condition outperformed the IF condition in sprint performance (g = 0.279, 95% CI [0.088, 0.470], p = 0.004). The subgroup analysis, which should be viewed with caution, suggested that the benefits associated with the EF strategy were significant in low-skill sprinters (g = 0.337, 95% CI [0.032, 0.642], p = 0.030) but not significant in high-skill sprinters (g = 0.246, 95% CI [−0.042, 0.533], p = 0.094), although no significant difference was seen between these subgroups (p = 0.670). The reported gain in sprint performance due to attentional focus has practical implications for coaches and athletes, as making tiny adjustments in verbal instructions can lead to significant behavioral effects of great importance in competitive sports.

The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effects of goal orientations and self-efficacy between competitive cognitive anxiety and motor performance under conditions featuring different levels of ego-threat. Eighty-one (40 females) collegiate-level basketball players (M age = 20.26 years and SD = 2.68) completed Sport Competitive Anxiety Test, Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire, and General Self-Efficacy Scale prior to the experiment. Athletes participated in two sessions of free-throw tasks. After the first session, which was under a control condition, participants performed in a free-throw competitive session while being provided opponents’ scores that induced different levels of competitive cognitive anxiety. Performance is defined as the accuracy (%) in two free-throw sessions. A hierarchical multiple regression showed that high level of task-orientation and low level of ego-orientation can buffer the impairment of competitive cognitive anxiety on motor performance. The relationship between competitive cognitive anxiety and motor performance did not vary with self-efficacy. An a repeated-measured analysis of covariance after cluster analysis revealed that a high-task/low-ego profile benefited athletes the most regarding the impairment of competitive cognitive anxiety. Together, ego- and task-orientations and “goal profile” moderate the relationship between competitive cognitive anxiety and motor performance; however, self-efficacy may not serve as a moderator variable in between.