Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 2008, 49, 133–140 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2008.00625.

Cognition and Neurosciences

Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Internal imagery training in active high jumpers

C.-J. OLSSON,1 BERT JONSSON2 and LARS NYBERG1,3
1
Department of Integrative Medical Biology (Physiology), Umeå University, Sweden
2
Department of Psychology, Umeå University, Sweden
3
Department of Radiation Sciences (Radiology) Umeå University, Sweden

Olsson, C.-J., Jonsson, B. & Nyberg, L. (2008). Internal imagery training in active high jumpers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 133–140.
The main purpose of this study was to examine whether the use of internal imagery would affect high jumping performance for active high
jumping athletes. Over a period of six weeks, a group of active high jumpers were trained with an internal imagery program for a total of 72
minutes. This group was compared to a control group consisting of active high jumpers that only maintained their regular work-outs during
the same time period. Four variables were measured; jumping height, number of failed attempts, take-off angle, and bar clearance. There was
a significant improvement on bar clearance for the group that trained imagery (p < 0.05) but not for the control group. No other differences
were found. The results suggest that internal imagery training may be used to improve a component of a complex motor skill. Possible
explanations and future recommendations are discussed.
Key words: Mental practice, internal imagery, training.
C.-J. Olsson, Department of Integrative Medical Biology (Physiology), Umeå University, S-901 87 Umeå, Sweden. Tel: +46 90786 5186-13;
fax: +46 90 786 6696; e-mail: cj.olsson@physiol.umu.se

INTRODUCTION shot. Thus, the participants in the physical + imagery group

Mental training is a broad term used in many situations. It
was defined by Richardson (1967) as the mental rehearsal of
a task without any muscular movement and is often referred
to as imagery. The question of whether a motor skill would
benefit from imagery training has been examined in several
studies (for overviews see e.g. Driskell, Copper & Moran,
1994; Feltz & Landers, 1983). Although the results have
varied across studies, the majority show that imagery training
results in positive effects on subsequent performance.
In one study, Mendoza and Wichman (1978) examined
the effects of imagery training on dart-throwing performance.
Participants were scored on their dart-throwing ability and
then assigned either to a control group that did nothing, to
a group that trained imagery, to a group that trained both
imagery and physically or to a group that only trained physically.
The training interventions lasted for six weeks with daily
training twice for 15 minutes. After the training sessions the
participants were again tested on their dart-throwing ability.
The conclusions were that physical practice was most effec-
tive and that imagery training either combined with physical
practice or by itself was more effective than no practice.
Another study examined how imagery training combined
with physical training would affect the approach shot for
golfer beginners (Brouziyne & Molinaro, 2005). The par-
ticipants either practiced imagery combined with physical
training, practiced physically, or had no practice (control)
for five weeks. The imagery practice consisted of mentally
representing (imagining) a scene close to reality before each
received as much physical practice as the physical group but
imagery practice was added on top of that. The performance
measure was how close to the pin they were on a 50 m shot.
The results showed that the physical + imagery group
improved significantly greater than the group that only
trained physically.
Grouios (1992) investigated the effects of imagery on
female springboard divers. They were first tested on a
selected dive and then the participants were randomly
assigned to physical practice, imagery practice or a control
group. The imagery practice group imagined themselves
performing the task 10 times each day for 21 days. The
physical practice group physically performed the springboard
dive for the same amount of time. The control group solved
crossword puzzles for approximately the same time. The
results showed that imagery training had positive effects on
springboard performance. In addition to these examples
there are several other studies showing positive effects of
imagery training on sport performance (e.g., Mamassis &
Doganis, 2004; Peynircioglu, Thompson & Tanielian, 2000;
Smith & Holmes, 2004; Wrisberg & Anshel, 1989).
Although most studies show positive effects of imagery
training, there are some that do not demonstrate such effects.
In a study by Mumford and Hall (1985), figure skaters’ ability
to use imagery training to improve a figure was investigated.
Three groups received imagery training and a control group
did not receive any imagery training. All three treatment
groups received four training sessions for one hour on separate
days and were then tested on the figure again. The results

© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600
Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. ISSN 0036-5564.
134 C.-J. Olsson et al.
showed no difference in performance between the four groups
after the imagery training (for other studies with null effects
from mental training see Corbin, 1967; Gordon, Weinberg &
Jackson, 1994; Nordin & Cumming, 2005; Taylor & Shaw, 2002).
A possible explanation for the different outcomes in studies
of mental imagery could be the type of sport examined.
Poulton (1957) categorized different sports into either closed
or open. In a closed sport, the environment never changes,
it is predictable, and every move can be planned in advance.
Examples of closed sports are golf and springboard diving.
In sports such as basketball, except for certain closed elements
such as free-throw shooting, the environment changes
constantly and little is known about the next move. Therefore
these sports are classified as open. Many individual sports
are closed and most team sports are open.
Weinberg, Butt, Knight, Burke and Jackson (2003) inves-
tigated the relationship between the use and effectiveness of
imagery in athletes from both individual and team sports.
They concluded that for a closed sport, such as high jump,
it is much easier to know what to imagine since there is the
possibility to prepare and imagine exactly what will take
place. This is in contrast to an open sport in which athletes
must be concerned with several factors that may impede the
performance. They also found that athletes in closed sports,
mostly individual sports, tended to find imagery more
effective than athletes in open sports. In a study comparing
individual and team sports use of imagery, Hall, Rodgers,
and Barr (1990) examined 381 female and male athletes
using a 37-item questionnaire. The participants were competi-
tive athletes from recreational/house league up to the inter-
national level. The results showed that athletes in closed
sports tended to use internal imagery more often than athletes
in open sports and also that higher level athletes tended to
use imagery to a greater extent than lower level athletes.
When examining the use of mental imagery among elite
athletes it was found that between 70 and 90% of elite
world-class athletes were using imagery training as a way to
enhance performance (for review see Jones & Stuth, 1997).
A second possible explanation for different outcomes in
studies of mental imagery could be based on the distinction
between external and internal imagery. Mahoney and
Avener (1977) classified the internal view of imagery as a
first person’s visual and kinesthetic view, experienced from
within and where the agent feels as if she/he is performing
the action. This should be distinguished from the external
view, where the agent takes the view of a spectator watching
the action as on a video. The common view seems to be that
internal imagery is more effective as performance enhance-
ment than is external imagery. For example, studies using
self-reported questionnaires among Olympic, national, and
university level athletes show that elite athletes tend to rely
more on internal imagery than non-elite athletes (Mahoney,
Gabriel & Perkins, 1987). Other studies support the view of
internal imagery being more effective than external imagery
(e.g., Fery & Morizot, 2000; Hale, 1982; Mahoney & Avener,
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
1977; Murphy, 1994; Rotella, Gansneder, Ojala & Billing,
1980). It is also known that internal imagery produces
greater physiological responses (Hale, 1982; Perry & Morris,
1995) and this is argued to be more effective on performance
outcomes (Holmes & Collins, 2001). In a study by Smith
(1987) in which specific conditions that help imagery training
in sport are outlined, the use of external imagery is simply
seen as a motivational factor that should not be discounted
for, although, as a performance enhancer the use of internal
imagery is more beneficial. In three experiments, Hardy and
Callow (1999) investigated external and internal imagery
perspectives on motor performance. They used experienced
athletes in karate learning a new kata, students learning a
simple gymnastics floor routine, and high-ability rock climbers
performing new boulder problems. They found that for the
acquisition of a task, external imagery was superior to internal.
However, internal imagery was more effective when the
athlete already had reached a certain level of expertise. Thus,
for active athletes, the internal view should be more effective
as a performance enhancer than the external view.
Type of outcome measures is a third, and much overlooked,
explanation for variability across studies of the effectiveness
of imagery. In studies of imagery training the measures are
generally in terms of hit or miss (e.g. when examining basket-
ball shooting) or in total performance (e.g. in gymnastics
routines). Having only one type of sub-optimal outcome
measure may be a reason why some studies of mental
imagery failed to show any effects. Support for this notion
comes from studies of physical performance, as in a study of
golf (Jagacinski, Greenberg & Liao, 1997). When looking at
golf tempo, which is the overall duration of a golf swing,
they found no significant difference between older and younger
players. However, when looking at another outcome
measure, the rhythm, which is the speeding up and slowing
down within a shot, a significant difference was found. To
have appropriate outcome measures may depend on having
appropriate equipment to estimate the outcomes. In studies
of children’s motor performance, the effects of additional
outcome measures and more advanced equipment is seen
clearly. Using film cameras, von Hofsten and Lindhagen
(1979) showed that children at about 4 months of age were
able to make a successful reach for a moving object. When
further decomposing children’s reaching trajectories into
movement elements, von Hofsten (1979) found that children
between 4 months and 6 months not only could make a
successful reach, but their reaching pattern was organized
into acceleration and deceleration phases. Using an optoe-
lectronic device, which is a technology based on monitoring
the movements using infrared light attached to the children,
von Hofsten (1991) showed that reaching trajectories become
straighter over time and, thus, have a structure similar to
adult reaching at approximately 6 months of age. One example
where type of outcome measure made a difference when
studying the effects of mental imagery was a study by
Ranganathan, Siemionow, Liu, Sahgal, and Yue (2004). In
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
this study the effects of mental imagery on a strength task
were examined. When comparing muscle volume before and
after imagery, as a measure of strength gain, they did not
find any effects of imagery training. However, when comparing
the total force exerted from the muscle, which also would be
a measure of strength, before and after imagery training,
there was a significant improvement.
The present study examined the effectiveness of internal
imagery on high jumping performance after taking into
account the above-mentioned factors. The recruited parti-
cipants, active high jumpers, were chosen because of high
jump being a closed sport, appropriate for imagery training.
Internal imagery was used because of its apparent advantage
over external imagery for athletes that are on a higher level.
When constructing the internal imagery program several
top-level high jumping coaches were contacted. They stressed
two critical technical components that influence jumping
height. These were take-off angle, which is the angle of the
lean of the athlete away from the bar, and bar clearance,
which is the bend over the bar where the athlete arches the
back by pulling their feet towards their head in order to
more efficiently clear the bar. The internal imagery program
included imagining of take-off as well as bar clearance. The
importance of appropriate outcome measures was considered
by using video analysis to analyze and quantify changes in
bar clearance and take-off angle. The main purpose of the
study was to investigate the effects of internal imagery training
on actual jumping performance and on the motor parameters
take-off angle and bar clearance. Of the latter two, the bar
clearance component is arguably the more complex process
from a cognitive/internal imagery point of view, involving a
complex series of movements. Thus, as internal imagery
tends to more easily benefit activities of high cognitive
complexity (Martin, Moritz & Hall, 1999; White & Hardy,
1995), we hypothesized that the bar clearance will benefit the
most from the internal imagery training. A related purpose
was to evaluate the relation between take-off angle, bar
clearance and jumping height. To the extent that jumping
height is related to take-off angle and bar clearance, a
positive relation was hypothesized.
METHOD
Participants
Twenty-four participants were recruited for this study. They ranged
in age from 16 to 29 years (mean age 19.3 years; SD 3.4 years).
There were 13 males and 11 females. Inclusion criteria for this study
were that the participants had to be competitive track and field
athletes competing at the national elite level. The participants were
recruited from a national track and field high school in Umeå,
Sweden. Also, active track and field athletes living in Umeå were
recruited. All the participants included had been training for a
substantial amount of time, thus there were no novel high jumpers
included in this study. Four participants dropped out from the study
because of injuries and leaving the city. The data was initially
screened for outliers and one participant had to be excluded. Therefore,
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Internal imagery training 135
the final sample included ten athletes in the motor group, with a
mean age of 20.2 years (SD = 4.1) and nine athletes in the motor +
imagery group, with a mean age of 18.1 years (SD = 2.6). The
participation was voluntary and the participants could drop out at
any time. The participants received a monetary reward of $125 after
completing all stages of the study.
Procedure
The study consisted of three main components: (I) pretest, (II)
intervention, and (III) post-test.
I. Pretest. The study started with pretest jumping (i.e. how high the
participants jumped before the intervention). For an overview of the
set-up for the pretest, see Fig. 1. They were asked to jump as high
as possible as if they were in a competition. The participants had a
maximum of three attempts on each height. The participants were
free to choose a starting height. They started to jump and after each
cleared height the bar was raised. To make sure that the participants
were going to get a chance to jump as high as possible they freely
decided the next jumping height. When the participant made three
failed attempts on a height the pretest was completed. The heights for
all jumps including the number of failed attempts were written down.
II. Intervention. The second part of the study was the intervention
or training phase. When all the participants were done with the
pretest, they were randomly assigned to one of two groups; either
the motor group or the motor + imagery group. The length of the
intervention phase was based on earlier studies on physical training
in which six weeks of practice led to positive effects on motor per-
formance (Karni, Meyer, Jezzard, Adams, Turner & Ungerleider,
1995). Each participant met individually with the experimenter for
12 sessions over a six-week period. Participants in the motor group
were asked to do a finger tapping task (not reported in this paper)
and a cognitive task (not reported in this paper). None of the tasks
had anything to do with high jumping and the session took approx-
imately 15 minutes. When participants in the motor + imagery
group met with the experimenter they did the same two tasks as
the motor group (tapping and cognitive). These tasks were added to
the experiment in order for both groups to spend approximately the
same amount of time with the experimenter minimizing the possibility
of experimenter effects. In addition, at the beginning of each session
they were asked to imagine high jump according to an internal
imagery instruction. This instruction was based on information
about high jump given by three high jumping coaches who trained
athletes on the top international level. Information was also taken
from international web-pages describing what is important when
performing and training high jump: www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/
highjump (16 August 2006); www.todd.acheson.com (16 August
2006). Before each imagery session it was made sure that the athletes
understood the concept of internal imagery and that it was important
that they tried to feel like they were executing the high jump when
imagining it.
The high jumping instruction for the internal imagery stated:
Imagine that you are running towards the bar in a calm pace. At the
curve you are slightly leaning inwards from the bar. In the last two
steps the legs run past the body and you lean slightly backwards. In
the take-off you plant the whole foot, you feel that the knee is
straight, and you lean away from the bar. The lead leg bends and is
parallel with the bar, the arms help you up. The take-off foot leaves
the ground; you rotate so that your back is against the bar. You pull
your heals towards your head so your back bends. You push your
hip up and lean your head back and pull your legs over the bar. You
land on the pit and you made the jump.
136 C.-J. Olsson et al.
Fig. 1. The set up was according to the figure and was the same for every participant. Two cameras were used to record the outcome measures
take-off angle and bar clearance. In the figure the runway path is from the right. For two of the participants the set-up was mirrored because
they jumped from the left side.
At each session, the participants in the motor + imagery group
imagined for 6 mins. They imagined repeatedly four times for 1.5
minutes with 30 s of rest in between. They were given the same
instruction each session and when there was 5 s left of rest
in between the imagery sessions they were told to get ready for
imagery. The participants were told to do their best at all times. The
total time the participants spent imagining high jump in the study
was 12 sessions × 6 mins. Some of the participants imagined with their
eyes closed and some imagined with their eyes open. When asking the
participants how many jumps they did when imagining they reported
that it took approximately 10 s to complete one jump; hence the
total number of jumps was about 8 for each 1.5 minute period.
III. Post-test. The third and last part of the study was the post-test.
The set-up was the same as during pretest (Fig. 1). The participants
started to jump on the same height as they did during the pretest.
In addition, when raising the bar it was also made sure that it was
raised to the same height as in the pretest. If the participants cleared
the height they stopped at during the pretest they kept on jumping
on higher heights until they made three false jumps. As in the
pretest, each jump was written down as a cleared jump or as a
false jump.
Instruments
Two cameras were used to film the high jumps. One camera was set
up in line with the position for bar clearance and the other where
the participants made their take-off (see Fig. 1). A Panasonic NV-
DS65 digital camera and a Sony DCR-TRV33E PAL digital camera
were used for the recordings. The films were analyzed using Adobe
Premiere Pro 1.5 and Adobe Illustrator CS2.
Outcome measures
All the heights that the athletes were jumping on, both cleared and
false jumps were marked. The video recordings were first taken over
from the video cameras into a data program for video editing,
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
Adobe Premiere Pro. To estimate the take-off angle, the video was
stopped at the first frame when the take-off foot was completely
planted on the ground. That particular frame was exported into
Adobe Illustrator CS2 where a line was drawn from the foot of the
participant through the middle of the head (see Fig. 2). The program
provided us the coordinates for this line and the angle for the take-off
was calculated using basic trigonometry. From the recordings of bar
clearance, the frame when the participant’s hip was over the bar was
exported to Adobe Illustrator CS2. In this context, the bar clearance
is defined as the distance between shoulder and foot. A line was
drawn from the foot to the left shoulder (see Fig. 2). The coordinates
were given by the program and the distance of the line was calculated
using trigonometry. In some jumps the bar clearance measure was
not possible to estimate. This was the case when the participants did
not follow through with the jump because they interrupted the
attempt shortly after take-off, pushing the bar down with their
hands. Another exclusion possibility was when the participants
jumped much higher than the bar, such that bending of the back
was unnecessary for the participants in order to clear the jump.
These jumps were excluded from the statistical analysis. Fifteen
jumps from the take-off and the bar clearance were randomly
selected for an inter-rater reliability test. The inter-class correlation
coefficient was 0.962, p < 0.01.
Improvements in the technique after the training sessions could be
shown in the take-off angle and the bar clearance. The imagery pro-
gram emphasized leaning away from the bar at take-off, and pulling the
feet towards the head during bar clearance. Therefore a performance
increase should result in a greater take-off angle and a smaller distance
between head and foot in bar clearance. A smaller distance would
improve the athletes’ jumping height because they would be able to
clear the bar more easily. In addition to these two parameters, improve-
ment was qualified as maximum height and number of false jumps.
Statistical analysis
After excluding the jumps where bar clearance was not measurable
at pretest, 19 participants performed a total of 46 jumps showing
bar clearance and 68 jumps showing take-off angle from. Each
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008) Internal imagery training 137

Fig. 2. The take-off angle was estimated by calculating the angle between the two lines (left picture). The bar clearance was estimated by
calculating the length of the line from the tip of the shoe to the left shoulder (right picture).

Table 1. Outcome measures for the motor (N = 10) and for the motor + mental group (N = 9) showing performance before and after the
imagery training as well as change in performance and statistical values

Group Outcome measure Pretest Posttest Change SD Statistics

Motor Height (cm) 160.3 162.2 1.9 5.9 t(9) = 0.91, p > 0.05
Take off (°) 14.4 15.0 0.6 1.6 t(9) = 1.45, p > 0.05
Bar clearance (mm) 68.7 65.9 −2.8 6.6 t(9) = 1.25, p > 0.05
False jumps 1.3 0.8 −0.5 1.9 t(9) = 1.46, p > 0.05
Motor Height (cm) 161.9 163.4 1.5 3.8 t(8) = 0.12, p > 0.05
+ Take off (°) 15.4 15.7 0.3 2.2 t(8) = 0.29, p > 0.05
Mental Bar clearance (mm) 74.5 70.3 − 4.2 7.1 t(8) = 2.31, p < 0.05
False jumps 2.1 1.1 −1.0 2.2 t(8) = 0.69, p > 0.05

height and corresponding take-off angle and bar clearance from the
pretest were correlated to validate the take-off angle and the bar
clearance measures as variables that are related to high jump
performance. If this shows a positive correlation it would strengthen
the coaches’ view of these variables being important for jumping
height and, thus, validating these measures. Independent samples
t-tests were done on the pretest and post-test performance for the
outcome measures height, take-off angle, bar clearance and false
jumps to see if the groups differed before and after the training
sessions. Within-group changes in performance were assessed using
paired samples t-tests. Also, a group by session (pre/post) mixed
ANOVA was done to see whether there was an interaction which
could be an indication of a selective improvement after imagery
training. Non-parametric tests for independent samples, Sign test,
were also computed to evaluate any differences between the two
groups after the training sessions in terms of the number of participants
that showed any improvement. The statistical calculations were
done using SPSS 13.0 and the alpha level was set to p < 0.05.
RESULTS
At pretest the correlation between take-off angle and height,
across groups, was significant (r (67) = 0.478, p < 0.01).
There was also a significant positive correlation between bar
clearance and height (r (45) = 0.574, p < 0.01).
There were no significant differences between the two
groups before the intervention, p > 0.05. Thus, any differences
between the groups after the intervention should be attributable
to the imagery training.
Table 1 shows the pretest values, the post-test values as
well as the change in the outcome measures used in this
study for the motor group and for the motor + imagery group.
Both groups tended to show positive improvements on all
the outcome measures.
Similar to the pretest results, there were no differences
between the two groups after the intervention phase. However,
a comparison of the pretest results with the post-test results
revealed a positive trend for both groups for bar clearance.
A group by session (pre/post) mixed ANOVA revealed a
tendency for an interaction on the bar clearance measure
(F(2, 17) = 3.22; p = 0.091). As expected the strongest effect
was for bar clearance, where an improvement was seen for
all participants in the intervention group. We further analyzed

© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
138 C.-J. Olsson et al.
this interaction by t-tests of the pre-post difference for each
group. We found that the difference was significant for the
mental + imagery group. For the motor group, the correspond-
ing change was not significant. No other outcome measures
showed a significant change, either for the motor + imagery
or the motor group. Also, there were no between-group
differences in the number of participants that improved after
the intervention.
DISCUSSION
The main purpose of this study was to examine whether
internal imagery would enhance high jumping performance
after six weeks of intervention. The control group, that
maintained their regular physical training program, showed
positive trends on all measured variables, although no
increase was statistically significant. A similar pattern was
seen for the intervention group, but for this group the
improvement was significant for one of the measured outcome
variables; bar clearance. For this variable, the intervention
group showed a 50% greater gain than in the control group,
suggesting that the internal imagery training program helped
to improve this component of the high jump. The internal
imagery program emphasized bar clearance by encouraging
the athletes to visualize bending the back and pulling the
feet towards the head. The significant result in the bar clearance
variable for the intervention group suggests that internal
imagery combined with regular physical practice improved
bar clearance greater than only maintaining physical practice.
Thus, internal imagery may help to improve a critical com-
ponent of high jumping.
The present study shows a relation between take-off angle,
bar clearance and height, thus confirming that bar clearance
and take-off angle are significant parameters for active high
jumpers to improve in order to jump higher. As a result,
these parameters are valid measures when investigating the
effects of imagery training. We observed no greater gain in
the height outcome measure after the intervention. On
average, both groups increased their height by less than 2 cm.
Given the limited length of the training program (6 weeks)
it is probably unrealistic to expect greater gains. One would
expect that enhanced technique improves performance and
since these results confirm the relationship among the
measured variables, over time, it is predicted that improved
bar clearance will lead to higher jumping height. Longer-term
studies are needed to address this issue.
It was possible to detect the changes in performance due
to the video analysis. The reason why some of the previously
done studies failed to show effects from mental imagery may
be due to not considering small improvements in technique.
If we had relied only on results categorized as hit or miss it
would be more difficult to determine whether an individual
has improved or not (cf. Schmidt & Lee, 1999). Thus, in
order to better understand the effects of mental imagery, future
research should emphasize both measuring motor performance
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
and using more appropriate outcome measures to detect small
but potentially important changes.
It was hypothesized that the bar clearance would benefit
most from the internal imagery program. The bar clearance
is the most complex component of the high jump. During
the bar clearance the athlete needs to rotate the body in the
air in order for the back to turn towards the bar. Also, the
athlete needs to push the hip up in order to arch the back
and, thus, clear the bar. Therefore it is argued that this com-
ponent is more complex, and has a lot of degrees of freedom
when executing it. As a result, it is in need of more cognitive
work than, for example, the take-off, which is more dependent
on physical power and thus have less degrees of freedom
when performing it. This complexity may be a reason for
the benefit of internal imagery on the bar clearance. This is
supported from findings that internal imagery is beneficial
for skills that require complex movements (White &
Hardy, 1995).
An important aspect of human research is individual
differences. Developmental theories explain individual dif-
ferences to be associated with individual development,
where genetic activity, neural activity, and behavior together
with environmental factors such as physical, social and
cultural, all together determine the individual development
and cause individual differences (Gottlieb, Wahlsten &
Lickliter, 1998). This is also likely to be a factor to take into
account when explaining performance effects from imagery
training. Everybody has the ability to use imagery; however
there are individual differences in how well one can create
these images (cf. Martin et al., 1999). It has been shown that
imagery is associated with sport performance, and also that
high confident athletes, who in addition were associated
with being top-level athletes, tend to have a higher ability to
perform imagery (Moritz, Hall, Martin & Vadocz, 1996).
Even though all the participants were advanced athletes in
this study they were on different achievement levels. It is
therefore likely that there were differences of the imagery
ability. Nonetheless all participants in the intervention group
increased their performance on the bar clearance measure. It
is suggested that if an athlete has a good imagery ability, the
imagery is more likely to have greater performance effects
compared to if the athlete has low imagery ability (Hall,
1998; Martin et al., 1999). Further, it seems to be a relationship
between the use of imagery and imagery ability, thus there is
a possibility to improve your imagery skill (Rodgers, Hall &
Buckolz, 1991; Vadocz, Hall & Moritz, 1997). Improving
your imagery ability will then improve the results of the
imagery training. Therefore, taking into account the individual
differences, in the present study it is likely that those athletes
that had high imagery ability might have been able to use the
imagery for the intended performance improvement at the
start of the training program. Those athletes that had a
low imagery ability first had to increase their imagery
ability and then were able to use the imagery to improve the
performance.
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
There are some limitations with this study. First, there
were a limited number of high jumpers available for this
study which resulted in small groups. Second, even though
the participants were advanced athletes, for internal imagery
to be effective, the participants must have a strong motor
representation of what they imagine. There is a possibility
that the participants in this study were not skilled enough
for the internal imagery to be very effective, which may have
affected the outcome. However, with these caveats in mind,
the conclusion from this study is that mental training can
improve a complex motor component in high jumping.
This research was supported by a grant to Lars Nyberg from CIF
(Centrum för Idrottsforskning), Sweden. The authors would also
like to thank the coaches for their help in making the imagery training
program and the athletes for participating in this study.
REFERENCES
Brouziyne, M. & Molinaro, C. (2005). Mental imagery combined
with physical practice of approach shots for golfer beginners.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 101, 203 –211.
Corbin, C. B. (1967). Effects of mental practice on skill development
after controlled practice. Research Quarterly, 38, 534 –538.
Driskell, J. E., Copper, C. & Moran, A. (1994). Does mental practice
enhance performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4),
481–492.
Feltz, D. L. & Landers, D. M. (1983). The effects of mental practice
on motor skill learning and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal
of Sport Psychology, 5, 25–57.
Fery, Y.-A. & Morizot, P. (2000). Kinesthetic and visual image in
modeling closed motor skills: The example of the tennis serve.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 90, 707–722.
Gordon, S., Weinberg, R. & Jackson, A. (1994). Effect of internal
and external imagery on cricket performance. Journal of Sport
Behavior, 17, 60–66.
Gottlieb, G., Wahlsten, D. & Lickliter, R. (1998). The significance
of biology for human development: A developmental psycho-
biological systems view. In W. Damon (Ed.) & R. M. Lerner
(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1. (5th edn,
pp. 233–273). New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Grouios, G. (1992). The effect of mental practice on diving per-
formance. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 23, 60 –
69.
Hale, B. D. (1982). The effects of internal and external imagery on
muscular and ocular concomitants. Journal of Sport Psychology,
4, 379–387.
Hall, C. R. (1998). Measuring imagery abilities and imagery use. In
J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measure-
ment (pp. 165–172). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
Hall, C. R., Rodgers, W. M. & Barr, K. A. (1990). The use of
imagery by athletes in selected sports. The Sport Psychologist, 4,
1–10.
Hardy, L. & Callow, N. (1999). Efficacy of external and internal
imagery perspectives for the enhancement of performance on
tasks in which form is important. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 21, 95–112.
Holmes, P. S. & Collins, D. J. (2001). The PETTLEP approach to
motor imagery: A functional equivalence model for sport
psychologists. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13(1),
60–83.
Jagacinski, R. J., Greenberg, N. & Liao, M.-J. (1997). Tempo,
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Internal imagery training 139
rhythm, and aging in golf. Journal of Motor Behavior, 29(2),
159–173.
Jones, L. & Stuth, G. (1997). The uses of mental imagery in athletics:
An overview. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 6, 101–115.
Karni, A., Meyer, G., Jezzard, P., Adams, M., Turner, R. & Ungerleider,
L. (1995). Functional MRI evidence for adult motor cortex
plasticity during motor skill learning. Nature, 377, 155–158.
Mahoney, M. J. & Avener, M. (1977). Psychology of the elite athlete:
An exploratory study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(2),
135 –141.
Mahoney, M. J., Gabriel, T. J. & Perkins, T. S. (1987). Psychological
skills and exceptional athletic performance. The Sport Psychologist,
1, 181–199.
Mamassis, G. & Doganis, G. (2004). The effects of a mental training
program on juniors pre-competitive anxiety, self-confidence, and
tennis performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16,
118 –137.
Martin, K. A., Moritz, S. E. & Hall, C. R. (1999). Imagery use in
sport: A literature review and applied model. The Sport Psy-
chologist, 13, 245 –268.
Mendoza, D. & Wichman, H. (1978). “Inner” darts: Effects of mental
practice on performance of dart throwing. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 47, 1195 –1199.
Moritz, S. E., Hall, C. R., Martin, K. A. & Vadocz, E. (1996). What
are confident athletes imaging? An examination of image con-
tent. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 171–179.
Mumford, B. & Hall, C. (1985). The effects of internal and external
imagery on performing figures in figure skating. Canadian Journal
of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 171–177.
Murphy, S. M. (1994). Imagery interventions in sport. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, 486 – 494.
Nordin, S. M. & Cumming, J. (2005). More than meets the eye:
Investigating imagery type, direction, and outcome. The Sport
Psychologist, 19, 1–17.
Perry, C. & Morris, T. (1995). Mental imagery in sport. In T. Morris
& J. Summers (Eds.), Sport psychology: Theory, applications and
issues. Queensland: John Wiley.
Peynircioglu, Z. F., Thompson, J. L. W. & Tanielian, T. B. (2000).
Improvement strategies in free-throw shooting and grip-strength
tasks. The Journal of General Psychology, 127(2), 145 –156.
Poulton, E. C. (1957). On prediction in skilled movements. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 54(6), 467– 478.
Ranganathan, V. K., Siemionow, V., Liu, J. Z., Sahgal, V. & Yue, G.
H. (2004). From mental power to muscle power – gaining
strength by using the mind. Neuropsychologia, 42, 944 –956.
Richardson, A. (1967). Mental practice: A review and discussion
(Part II). Research Quarterly, 38(2), 263 –273.
Rodgers, W., Hall, C. & Buckolz, E. (1991). The effect of an imagery
training program on imagery ability, imagery use, and figure
skating performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 3,
109 –125.
Rotella, R. J., Gansneder, B., Ojala, D. & Billing, J. (1980). Cognitions
and coping strategies of elite skiers: An exploratory study of
young developing athletes. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2, 350–
354.
Schmidt, R. A. & Lee, T. D. (1999). Motor control and learning: A
behavioral emphasis, 3rd edn. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Smith, D. (1987). Conditions that facilitate the development of
sport imagery training. The Sport Psychologist, 1, 237–247.
Smith, D. & Holmes, P. (2004). The effect of imagery modality on
golf putting performance. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,
26(3), 385 –395.
Taylor, J. A. & Shaw, D. F. (2002). The effects of outcome imagery
on golf-putting performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20,
607 – 613.
Vadocz, E. A., Hall, C. R. & Moritz, S. E. (1997). The relationship
140 C.-J. Olsson et al.
between competitive anxiety and imagery use. Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 9, 241–253.
von Hofsten, C. (1979). Development of visually directed reaching:
The approach phase. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 5,
160–178.
von Hofsten, C. (1991). Structuring of early reaching movements: A
longitudinal study. Journal of Motor Behavior, 23(4), 280 –292.
von Hofsten, C. & Lindhagen, K. (1979). Observations on the develop-
ment of reaching for moving objects. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 28, 158–173.
White, A. & Hardy, L. (1995). Use of different imagery perspectives
© 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 49 (2008)
on the learning and performance of different motor skills.
British Journal of Psychology, 86, 169–180.
Weinberg, R., Butt, J., Knight, B., Burke, K. L. & Jackson, A.
(2003). The relationship between the use and effectiveness of
imagery: An exploratory investigation. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 15, 26 – 40.
Wrisberg, C. A. & Anshel, M. H. (1989). The effect of cognitive
strategies on the free throw shooting performance of young
athletes. The Sport Psychologist, 3, 95 –104.
Received 25 April 2007, accepted 13 July 2007