Empirical findings consistently suggest that an external focus of attention leads to superior performance when compared to an internal focus by encouraging more automatic processing. However, for certain skills (e.g., gymnastics routines) it can be challenging to identify a meaningful external focus cue. A related line of research suggests that focusing on the general feeling of a movement (i.e., holistic focus) may also be useful in avoiding conscious control of movements. The purpose of this study was to determine how an internal focus (INT), external focus (EXT), and holistic focus (HOL) impact the performance of a standing long jump. Participants (N = 27) completed two baseline jumps followed by two jumps in each focus condition. Jump distance was analyzed in a 6 (Order) × 4 (Focus) mixed ANOVA. Results indicated a significant main effect of focus (p < .001), with EXT and HOL resulting in farther jumps than INT and baseline conditions (p-values < .05). EXT and HOL did not differ significantly from each other, and INT did not differ significantly from baseline. The findings suggest that a holistic focus can be another effective means of avoiding conscious control of movement when an external focus is not practical or desired.

Attentional focus research consistently suggests that the use of an external focus of attention improves motor learning and performance relative to an internal focus. It appears, however, that external focus cues are not frequently adopted in applied sport settings. One issue that may contribute to this disparity relates to variability in how cues are employed in research and practice. Experimental research tends to use a single-cue approach, while in sports, athletes often sample several cues within the same practice. A limitation of the single-cue approach is that attentional focus effects could be due either to focus direction (internal vs. external) or to the relative effectiveness of a particular cue (e.g. an effective externally focused cue vs. an ineffective internally focused cue). This study tested whether external focus benefits generalize to situations in which participants use multiple cues of the same type throughout acquisition. Volunteers (N = 22) learned a dart throwing task while using three internally or externally focused cues. Results indicated an external focus led to lower error scores during acquisition and a delayed retention test (p’s < .05). These results demonstrate that the external focus benefit generalizes to situations where a performer uses multiple cues.

It has been consistently reported that an external focus of attention leads to better motor performance than an internal focus, but no research to date has explored this effect in a population with visual impairments (VI). External focus statements typically reference something in the environment (e.g., target) that may be difficult to conceptualize for people with VI since they cannot generate a visual representation of the object of focus. Internal focus statements could be more closely identifiable with proprioception that is not impaired in this population. Recent studies have reported that sighted adults with temporarily obstructed vision are able to receive an external focus benefit when performing discrete tasks (i.e., golf putt, vertical jump), however it is unclear if those with VI would experience the same benefit. The purpose of this investigation was to compare how an internal focus and external focus impact the balance of children with VI. Eighteen children with VI were grouped into a moderate (n = 11) and a profound VI group (n = 7). Participants completed a familiarization trial, an internal focus trial (i.e., focusing on feet) and an external focus trial (i.e., focusing on markers) in a counterbalanced order. The moderate VI group had a lower root mean square error while using an external focus (p = .04), while the profound VI group did not differ between conditions (p > .05). These results suggest that while performing a task reliant on sensory feedback, an external focus benefit may be dependent on the severity of VI. Further research is needed to examine whether external focus statements can be presented in a way that may be more intuitive to those with profound VI. These findings may help to influence how professionals in health-related fields (e.g., physical therapist, physical educators) give instructions on motor performance to populations with VI.