20.3: Imagery

Most people do not realize how often they use imagery. When you are driving to a restaurant you’ve been to a few times but don’t quite remember exactly when that last turn is, you might picture that parking structure that comes up immediately before that turn. This not only helps you remember when to turn, but also, in what direction. This brief “mental movie” you’ve created is imagery. In sport, a volleyball player might imagine what the hitter’s hand and wrist look likes when they are going to dump(versus hit) the ball so they can then mentally practice how to move in response. Imagery is a cheap, adaptable, and learnable psychological skill widely used by athletes at all competitive levels.

20.3.1. What is Imagery?

Imagery is any sort of detailed mental experience you purposefully create in your mind using some combination of your memories, senses, thoughts, and emotions. By “purposefully”, we mean you are generating the image with the expectation that it is going to help you in some way, much like the examples in the previous paragraph (e.g., Morris et al., 2005). Because imagery doesn’t require any external equipment or specific training space, imagery can be done almost any time and anywhere.

20.3.2. Conceptualizing Imagery

It is widely-known that objective performance improvements are achievable through regular and structured imagery use (for a review, see Munroe-Chandler & Guerrero, 2017). Meta-analyses conducted on the efficacy of imagery use on motor learning and performance by Driskell and colleagues (1994) and Feltz and Landers (1983) revealed small-to-moderate effect sizes of 0.53 and 0.48, respectively. Many years later, Simonsmeier et al. (2020) conducted a meta-analysis on the effects of imagery interventions in sport, and reported similar findings (i.e., overall effect size of 0.43). Furthermore, Simonsmeier and colleagues found that imagery intervention could positively and significantly influence not only physical outcomes of performance, but also motivational and affective outcomes (e.g., feelings, emotions).

We are less clear, however, as to exactly why imagery use is beneficial. Nevertheless, there are a few theories that do help us understand imagery’s influence on our learning and performance. Two such theories are the bio-informational theory (Lang, 1979) and the triple code theory (Ahsen, 1984).

Lang’s (1979) bio-informational theory suggests that mental images contain two main parts:stimulus propositions and response propositions. Stimulus propositions are the characteristics of the skill or scenario to be imaged (i.e., what you’re doing and what your surroundings are), while response propositions are the physiological (i.e., physical sensations) and affective responses that the individual experiences when imaging that particular skill or scenario. For example, a baseball player may imagine the fans, the opposing team’s pitcher and defense, the score and the count, and themselves in the batter’s box waiting for the pitch (stimulus propositions). However, they may also incorporate into this image the physical sensation of their heart beating faster, hands feeling sweaty, and general feelings of excitement and optimism (response propositions). The bio-informational theory posits that imaging a skill or scenario with the particular associated response propositions – even if they are considered debilitative or negative responses – can help an individual improve their performance as they are mentally simulating the actual task, including the affective responses. In doing so, the individual is more closely simulating the task as it would occur in real life.

One of the more comprehensive theories of imagery to-date is Ahsen’s (1984) triple code theory (ISM). This theory is similar to Lang’s (1979) bio-informational theory, however, Ahsen’s theory offers a third element to its operational definition. The image (I) is similar to Lang’s stimulus propositions in which effective images are vivid and realistic, closely replicating the physical/environmental elements present in the real-world experience. The second source of information involves the individual’s somatic responses (S; similar to Lang’s response propositions) in which imaging a task results in psychophysiological changes to an individual such as an increase in heart rate, sweaty palms, or other somatic responses to anxiety or arousal. The third source of information is the meaning of the image (M)to the imager; this is highly related to the intended purpose of generating the image (e.g., the image being created means that the individual is ready to perform and optimally focused). Triple code theory states that the most effective images are vivid and realistic, evoke psychophysiological response, and impart meaning to the individual.

20.3.3. Why is Imagery Important?

One direction of imagery research has been to advance explanations of the relevance of imagery use in sport and physical activity (e.g., Hall et al., 1998). In a landmark sport imagery publication, Paivio (1985) proposed an analytic framework which explained that imagery could serve both cognitive and motivational functions (function refers to the intended purpose of the image). He added that each function operates on either a “specific” or a “general” level. A number of years later, Hall and his colleagues (1998) added further delineation to the functions of imagery, resulting in five functions. Specifically, the purpose of one’s images could be: cognitive general (CG: assist in learning, development or mastery of strategies, game planes, or routines); cognitive specific (CS; assist in the learning, development or mastery of specific sport skills); motivational specific (MS; regulate effort and affect relating to achieving one’s goal); motivational general arousal (MG-A; regulate arousal and stress); and,motivational general mastery (MG-M; increase mental toughness, perceptions of control, or self-confidence). It is important to note that individuals can choose to employ multiple functions of imagery at the same time, for a single image (e.g., Cumming & Williams, 2013). For example, a high jumper using an image of themselves executing a jump in competition may be choosing to employ imagery to help practice the skill (i.e., CS imagery), but, at the same time, may also intend to use that image to increase their confidence in their ability to execute the jump successfully (i.e., MG-M imagery).

20.3.4. Application

One of the most important variables impacting imagery effectiveness relates to the learner’s ability to create vivid and controllable images (Munroe-Chandler & Guerrero, 2017). This is known as imagery ability. Simply put, if you can create a mental movie in your mind that plays from start to finish and that “looks” and “feels” real to you, wherein you can precisely control exactly what is happening in the movie, then your imagery will be highly effective. Imagery is a psychological skill, and thus, is learnable (i.e., you can get better at it with training and practice; e.g., Wright et al., 2015). Those who are not proficient at imagery should not be discouraged from using the skill if they are willing to devote time and energy to develop it. For example, Rodgers and colleagues (1991) reported that the ability to image basic movements improved in figure skaters following a 16-week figure skating imagery training program. More recently, an eight-week intervention conducted by Wright and colleagues (2015) demonstrated that imagery training improved imagery ability in a sample of female golfers. Researchers have suggested at least a moderate level of imagery ability prior to beginning an imagery practice routine or program for sport is important (e.g., Cumming & Ste-Marie, 2001). Below are two possible avenues in which coaches or sport psychology consultants can train imagery and thus enhance its effectives with sport participants.

20.3.4.1. Layered Stimulus Response Training (LSRT)

Layered Stimulus Response Training (LSRT) is an imagery training method based on the bio-informational theory (Lang, 1979). Cumming and her colleagues have developed and employed this training method in previous studies (e.g., Cumming et al., 2007; Williams et al., 2013) and have found it effective in improving imagery ability as well as actual motor performance. This training method consists of helping an individual learn how to construct vivid and controllable images by starting with generation of the most salient stimulus proposition(s) (relative to the imager’s perceptions) such as the immediate environment of the scenario being imaged, any equipment they may use, and/or others around. Following practice of this base “layer”, the imager would then be instructed to add another layer—essentially, more nuance to their images—by incorporating other stimulus propositions to their current image layer. These nuances typically involve senses other than vision (e.g., the smell of fresh cut grass, the sound of a ball hitting the sweet spot of the tennis racket, feeling dirt moving under one’s shoes, etc.). Following practice of the first and second layers, the last layer involves incorporating response propositions by having the imager try to feel the emotions they want associated with their image and/or any particular moods, thoughts, or beliefs they believe will be facilitative of the scenario being imaged. Initial research examining the effectiveness of LSRT has been promising (e.g., Marshall & Wright, 2016) and thus LSRT should be considered for any novice imager.

20.3.4.2. PETTLEP Approach to Imagery

Holmes and Collins (2001) proposed the PETTLEP approach (also known as the PETTLEP model) to motor imagery to guide precisely how one structures their images and their imagery practice.PETTLEP is an acronym that stands for physical, environmental, task, timing, learning, emotional, and perspective.This approach is based on the notion that mentally imaged actions and actual physical execution of actions are “functionally equivalent”. Neuroimaging techniques, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) allow neuroscientists to examine the areas of the brain that are activated when mentally imaging versus when physically performing actions (for a review, see Ruffino et al., 2017). Holmes and Collins (2001) have suggested that, “if physical and mental practice are [functionally] equivalent, then many of the procedures shown to be efficacious in physical practice should also be applied in mental [imagery] practice as well” (p. 62).The PETTLEP model was intended to highlight several of these key efficacious procedures, or elements, which should be considered when preparing to use imagery. These include physical, environmental, task, timing, learning, emotional, and perspective (PETTLEP) elements:

1. Physical: Athletes should try to best approximate the physical state required when they are performing the situation to be imaged in real life, successfully. Holmes and Collins suggest that athletes become actively involved during their imagery session, perhaps employing sporting implements, wearing competition clothing, and even making physical movements, when appropriate.
2. Environment: Accurate and vivid mental recreation of the training or competition environment using all relevant senses can enhance imagery. Holmes and Collins suggest using aids, such as photo, video, or verbal accounts of the actual training or performance environment to ensure a realistic recreation of the surroundings.
3. Task: Careful consideration of how the individual personally experiences the task to determine the appropriate content and focus of their image. Holmes and Collins suggest that athletes may differ with regards to the specific elements of the task they focus on when physically performing (e.g., a novice might focus internally on feeling balanced while a more skilled individual might focus externally on the basket during a free throw shot). In addition, different athletes may prefer different visual perspectives when imaging (i.e., first- versus third-person perspectives, or, a combination).
4. Timing: Generally, it is recommended that images should unfold in real-time speed (the speed at which actual physical execution occurs). However, more recent research suggests that, indeed, real-time image speed is critical when athletes are working on learning/mastering sport skill/strategy timing or tempo, but interestingly, that slow- and fast-motion speed images are also being used deliberately by athletes, and that their use can produce positive effects on learning and performance (e.g., O & Hall, 2009, 2013; O et al., 2020).
5. Learning: Images should be adapted as an athlete's focus and/or execution quality changes. As an athlete becomes more skilled, Holmes and Collins suggest that image content should be reviewed and updated (if necessary), to ensure functional equivalence.
6. Emotion: Encourage athletes, when imaging, to experience any emotions they have when physically performing successfully. These emotions should ideally be experienced at the same level of intensity as they are experienced in real life.
7. Perspective: This element refers to the primary sense used to experience the image (e.g., sight, kinaesthetic and/or tactile feel, sound, smell, and/or taste). Holmes and Collins suggest that a kinaesthetic focus (e.g., feeling the movements) will result in the greatest physiological response to the imagery session, thus leading to more effective learning and performance outcomes.

The PETTLEP approach to motor imagery (Holmes & Collins, 2001) is a theoretically driven and evidence-based checklist intended to maximize the effectiveness of athletes’ imagery use. The model has received significant support via testing of various PETTLEP elements (e.g., for a review, see Wakefield et al., 2012). Incorporating every single element of the PETTLEP model is not currently noted as a “requirement” to achieve positive effects of applying the model. Thus, although incorporating all seven PETTLEP elements may, perhaps, elicit the greatest effects on imagery practice outcomes, athletes can also feel confident in the benefits of incorporating only a few of these elements if time, motivation, and/or resources prohibit full PETTLEP alignment of one’s imagery practice.