[Introduction]: The emergence of sport psychology has influenced how athletes train and compete. Increasingly, coaches and athletes are incorporating mental as well as physical skills into their training programs and competition routines. Imagery is one such mental skill. To

develop an imagery program tailored to the athlete three pieces of information are vital: the imagery ability of the athlete; the effect of imagery on performance; and the motive for using imagery. This paper explores measurement of the imagery ability of the athlete. Specifically,

the aim was to create new and valid measures of kinaesthetic imagery and examine the relationship these measures share with existing measures of imagery

Burton, Lorelle

Dun, Kristine

English

University of Southern Queensland ePrints

Kinesthetic imagery: does it exist and how can we measure it?

Kinaesthetic Imagery: Does it exist and how can we measure it?1  Kristine Dun and Lorelle Burton University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba  Key Words: Kinaesthetic Imagery, Visual Imagery  Introduction The emergence of sport psychology has influenced how athletes train and compete. Increasingly, coaches and athletes are incorporating mental as well as physical skills into their training programs and competition routines.  Imagery is one such mental skill.  To develop an imagery program tailored to the athlete three pieces of information are vital: the imagery ability of the athlete; the effect of imagery on performance; and the motive for using imagery. This paper explores measurement of the imagery ability of the athlete. Specifically, the aim was to create new and valid measures of kinaesthetic imagery and examine the relationship these measures share with existing measures of imagery.  Main Text Imagery is commonly utilised by athletes to enhance performance (Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998). Imagery has been shown to increase concentration, aid motivation, alter arousal levels (Hecker & Kaczor, 1988), and enhance the acquisition of a new skill (Driskell, Copper, & Moran, 1994).  Visual imagery is understood through the processes necessary to generate and manipulate the image (Kosslyn, 1980). So, vividness (Poltrock & Agnoli, 1986), maintenance (Denis, 1991), and control (Kosslyn)  are aspects used to measure visual imagery ability. Measures of imagery are either self-report questionnaires such as Betts’ Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery (QMI) (Richardson, 1969) or objective tests including and the Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Dermen, 1976). Research on imagery use in sport has examined the type of imagery used by athletes, when and where imagery is used, and whether imagery has a positive effect on performance. While athletes use imagery differentially in training, competition (Munroe, Hall, Simms, & Weinberg, 1998), and the off-season (Cummings & Hall, 2002), imagery is used most often just prior to competition (Munroe, Giacobbi, Hall, & Weinberg, 2000) or to overcome difficulty in competition (White & Hardy, 1998). Research on the effect of imagery on performance has found that use of kinaesthetic imagery may positively impact on athletic learning (Smyth & Waller, 1998) and performance (Fery & Morizot, 2000). Further, kinaesthetic imagery is considered particularly important when form of movement is the desired performance outcome (Fery, 2003). Imagery may be defined in terms of the content of the image (Hall et al., 1998; Paivio, 1985). Content is broken into cognitive and motivational imagery (Paivio). In competition the skill level of the athlete influences the type of imagery that is positively associated with confidence (Callow & Hardy, 2001). Additionally, imagery ability is associated with the content of imagery that is used most often (Moritz, Hall, Martin, & Vodocz, 1996).  Imagery may also be defined by the sense it imitates including auditory, visual, gustatory, tactile, olfactory, and kinaesthetic. Kinaesthetic imagery refers to the ability to imagine the feeling of the body as it moves. There are two known measures of kinaesthetic imagery: The Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ) developed by Isaac,                                                1 Author’s accepted version of : Dun, Kristine and Burton, Lorelle J. (2005) Kinesthetic imagery: does it exist and how can we measure it? In: 11th World Congress of Sport Psychology, Sydney, Australia. Marks, and Russell (1986); and the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-Revised (Hall & Martin, 1997). Both measures are self-report and developed with a bi-factor structure measuring visual and kinaesthetic imagery (Hall & Martin; Isaac, et al.). Despite an increase in research on kinaesthetic imagery ability less is known about this construct than the more popular visual imagery construct. The bi-factor structure of the VMIQ has been questioned, suggesting that it measures only visual imagery (Campos & Perez, 1990). The MIQ-R contains only four items of kinaesthetic imagery that measure ease of imagery. Similar to visual imagery, kinaesthetic imagery may possess a number of processes such as vividness and control. Thus, it is important to develop new measures that capture the complexity of kinaesthetic imagery ability. The first aim of this study was to develop reliable and valid measures of kinaesthetic imagery that address the complexity of the construct. The second aim was to investigate the relationship between newly developed and established measures of imagery. Two new measures of kinaesthetic imagery, the Vividness of Kinaesthetic Imagery (VKI), and the Control of Kinaesthetic Imagery (CKI), were devised and validated. It was hypothesised that the VKIQ and CKIQ would show stronger correlations with the MIQ-R and the VMIQ, than with measures of visual imagery ability. It was also hypothesised that factor analysis of all questionnaires would result in the emergence of a visual imagery ability factor and a kinaesthetic imagery ability factor. To test these hypotheses 149 participants from the University of Southern Queensland completed a battery of seven imagery questionnaires. The battery included: Betts’ Vividness of Imagery Scale (QMI) (Richardson, 1969) a measure of vividness of imagery; Gordon Test of Visual Control (TVIC) (Richardson) a measure of control of imagery; Dean and Morris Imagery Questionnaire (D&M) (Dean & Morris, 1991) a total measure of visual imagery; Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ) (Isaac, et al., 1986) a measure of visual and kinaesthetic imagery of movement; Movement Imagery Questionnaire-Revised (MIQ-R) (Hall & Martin, 1997) a measure of ease of visual and kinaesthetic imagery of movement; Vividness of Kinaesthetic Imagery (VKI) designed to measure vividness of kinaesthetic imagery and ease of imagery; and Control of Kinaesthetic Imagery (CKI) designed to measure control of kinaesthetic imagery and ease of image evocation. Results as summarised here demonstrated that both the VKI and the CKI had excellent reliability with each exhibiting a Cronbach  = .96 (Nunally, 1978). Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) was used to examine the factor structure of the VKI and the CKI. The results showed that both had a uni-dimensional structure. Analysis of the Pearson Product Moment Correlation provided good criterion-related validity for the VKI as the VKI correlated most highly with the kinaesthetic and vividness measures. Similarly, the criterion-related validity of the CKI was moderate. The CKI demonstrated similar correlations with all measures suggesting that control is an important aspect of: the vividness of an image; visual imagery ability; and kinaesthetic imagery ability.  A single factor emerged from the PAF on the complete battery of questionnaires signifying a single imagery factor with kinaesthetic and visual components. This is in accordance with other imagery research that has found it difficult to distinguish the factors of imagery ability (see e.g. Burton & Fogarty, 2003).  Conclusions The new measures of kinaesthetic imagery, the VKI and the CKI, were shown to be uni-dimensional measures with good reliability and validity characteristics. Analysis of the relationship between the VKI, CKI and established measures of imagery demonstrated that at this stage it is difficult to distinguish between visual and kinaesthetic imagery ability. The new measures of kinaesthetic imagery ability require refinement, but offer greater specificity for researchers interested in examining the effect of these abilities on performance. This information may then be utilised by athletes, coaches and sports psychologists in order to determine the best way to incorporate kinaesthetic imagery into a training program.  References Burton, L. J., & Fogarty, G. J. (2003). The factor structure of visual imagery and spatial abilities. Intelligence, 31, 289-318. Callow, N., & Hardy, L. (2001). Types of imagery associated with sport confidence in netball players of varying skill levels. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 31, 1-17. Campos, A., & Perez, M. J. (1990). A factor analytic study of two measures of mental imagery. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 71, 995-1001. Cummings, J., & Hall, C. (2002). Athletes' use of imagery in the off-season. Sport Psychologist, 16, 160-172. Dean, G. M., & Morris, P. E. (1991). Imagery and spatial ability: When introspective reports predict performance. In R. H. Logie & M. Denis (Eds.), Mental images in human cognition (pp. 331-347). North-Holland: Elsevier. Denis, M. (1991). Image and cognition. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Driskell, J. E., Copper, C., & Moran, A. (1994). Does mental practice enhance performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 481-492. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Fery, Y.-A. (2003). Differentiating visual and kinesthetic imagery in mental practice. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 1-10. Fery, Y.-A., & Morizot, P. (2000). Kinesthetic and visual image in modeling closed motor skills: The example of the tennis serve. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 90, 707-722. Hall, C. R., Mack, D. E., Paivio, A., & Hausenblas, H. A. (1998). Imagery use by athletes: Development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 29, 73-89. Hall, C. R., & Martin, K. A. (1997). Measuring movement imagery abilities: A revision of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire. Journal of Mental Imagery, 21, 143-154. Hecker, J. E., & Kaczor, L. M. (1988). Application of imagery theory to sport psychology: Some preliminary findings. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10, 363-373. Isaac, A., Marks, D. F., & Russell, D. G. (1986). An instrument for assessing imagery of movement: The Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ). Journal of Mental Imagery, 10, 23-30. Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Moritz, S. E., Hall, C. R., Martin, K. A., & Vodocz, E. (1996). What are confident athletes imaging? An examination of image content. Sport Psychologist, 10, 171-179. Munroe, K., Hall, C., Simms, S., & Weinberg, R. (1998). The influence of type of sport and time of season on athletes' use of imagery. Sport Psychologist, 12, 440-449. Munroe, K. J., Giacobbi, P. R., Jr., Hall, C., & Weinberg, R. (2000). The four Ws of imagery use: Where, when, why, and what. Sport Psychologist, 14, 119-137. Nunally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Paivio, A. (1985). Cognitive and motivational functions of imagery in human performance. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 22-28. Poltrock, S. E., & Agnoli, F. (1986). Are spatial visualisation ability and visual imagery ability equivalent? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 3, pp. 255-296). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Richardson, A. (1969). Mental Imagery. New York: Springer. Smyth, M. M., & Waller, A. (1998). Movement imagery in rock climbing: Patterns of interference from visual, spatial and kinaesthetic secondary tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 145-157. White, A., & Hardy, L. (1998). An in-depth analysis of the uses of imagery by high-level slalom canoeists and artistic gymnasts. Sport Psychologist, 12, 387-403. 

A factor analytic study of two measures of mental imagery.

An in-depth analysis of the uses of imagery by high-level slalom canoeists and artistic gymnasts.

An instrument for assessing imagery of movement: The Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ).

Application of imagery theory to sport psychology: Some preliminary findings.

Are spatial visualisation ability and visual imagery ability equivalent? In

Athletes' use of imagery in the off-season.

Cognitive and motivational functions of imagery in human performance.

Differentiating visual and kinesthetic imagery in mental practice.

Does mental practice enhance performance?

Image and cognition. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Image and Mind.

Imagery and spatial ability: When introspective reports predict performance. In

Imagery use by athletes: Development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire.

Kinesthetic and visual image in modeling closed motor skills: The example of the tennis serve.

Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests.

Measuring movement imagery abilities: A revision of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire.

Mental Imagery.

The factor structure of visual imagery and spatial abilities.

The four Ws of imagery use: Where, when, why, and what.

The influence of type of sport and time of season on athletes' use of imagery.

Types of imagery associated with sport confidence in netball players of varying skill levels.

What are confident athletes imaging? An examination of image content.

http://eprints.usq.edu.au/7872/1/Dun_Burton_ISSP_2005_AV.pdf

Kinesthetic imagery: does it exist and how can we measure it?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Southern Queensland ePrints

University of Southern Queensland ePrints