Focusing Along Multiple Dimensions: Spatial, Temporal, and Modal Aspects of Distality
Aus Small World
Mathias Hegele - Leibniz Research Center for Work Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund
Daniel Erlacher - Institute for Sport and Sport Science, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Bitte zitieren nach: Hegele, M. & Erlacher, D. (2007). Focusing Along Multiple Dimensions: Spatial, Temporal, and Modal Aspects of Distality. In E.-J. Hossner & N. Wenderoth (Eds.), Wulf on attentional focus and motor learning [Target article]. E-Journal Bewegung und Training, 1, 21-22. Retrieved 09.26.2007, from http://www.ejournal-but.de
Inhaltsverzeichnis |
Zusammenfassung
In vielen Studien des Überblicksbeitrags wird Distalität als Ausdruck der Effektnähe im Sinne eines räumlichen Bezugsrahmens konzeptualisiert. Hier wird hingegen für die Auffassung von Distalität als multidimensionales Konzept plädiert, so dass Aufmerksamkeit auch in anderen Dimensionen auf distale Effekte zu lenken ist und dies mit differentiellen Effekten der Aufmerksamkeitsfokussierung verbunden sein kann.
Abstract
In many studies reviewed in the target article, distality as a concept of effect vicinity is used in terms of a spatial frame of reference. It is argued here that by conceiving distality as a multidimensional concept, attention can also be directed towards distal effects along other dimensions as well yielding differential effects of attentional focusing.
Focusing Along Multiple Dimensions
Questions concerning the influence of an individual’s attentional focus on processes of motor control and learning have led to a considerable amount of experimental work in human movement science. The empirical evidence reviewed by Wulf (2007) seems to indicate that it is generally more beneficial to direct a performer’s attention to external, that is, distal effects of an executed movement instead of directing attention towards more proximal aspects of the movement itself, such as for example, effects on the sensory surface of the body or patterns of muscle activation. These findings along with the constrained action hypothesis suggest that an effective focus of attention is most notably characterized by its distality.
The idea that distality as a prerequisite for successful attentional guidance should not be conceived in terms of distance from one’s body but in terms of the vicinity to environmental action effects has already been articulated by Prinz (1997) and was subsequently supported by Wulf and colleagues who demonstrated that in order for an external focus of attention to be effective, attention needs to be directed not just away from movement execution, but towards the movement’s actual effect (Wulf, McNevin, Fuchs, Ritter, & Toole, 2000, Experiment 1). Those effects, however, can be expressed within multiple frames of reference, e.g. by specifying its spatial location or its time of occurrence, so that attention can be directed towards distal effects along different dimensions. Based on the literature reviewed by Wulf (2007), it remains unclear if distal referencing is equally necessary or beneficial along different effect dimensions.
Hossner, Hegele, Erlacher, and Ehrlenspiel (2006) offered a systematic differentiation of distality along three dimensions: spatial, temporal, and modal. The first dimension relates to the spatial orientation of distality. In the majority of studies reviewed by Wulf (2007), the distinction between external and internal attentional foci can be mapped within a spatial frame of reference. For example, McNevin, Shea, and Wulf (2003) employed a balancing task and told participants to focus either internally on their feet or externally on markers, which were attached to a stabilometer platform and which were spatially more distant from the body. The superior performance of the external focus group supports the importance of distality along the spatial dimension. The second dimension relates to the temporal aspects of a movement. For example, in a study by Wulf and colleagues (2000), tennis players were instructed to focus either on the tennis ball approaching (antecedent) or the ball leaving the racket (effect). The better results of the effect group suggest that it should make a difference if the focus of attention is directed to an aspect of the movement which is temporally closer to the effect. Finally, the third dimension refers to the modality by which individuals attend to environmental effects or movement characteristics. This distinction has only received implicit experimental considerations and no direct comparisons have been made. For instance, in many studies that employed a balancing task (e.g., McNevin et al., 2003), subjects were instructed to focus visually on their feet or on markers attached to the stabilometer platform. Alternatively, subjects in a study by Vance and colleagues (Vance, Wulf, Töllner, McNevin, & Mercer, 2004) had to use proprioceptive information in order to attend to the instructed internal and external focus of attention. Since those were two different studies using different tasks and experimental procedures, it is difficult to directly compare their results, but one could argue that the visual modality might be conceived as a more distal way of attending to an action effect, because vision, as it is serving exteroception, is commonly directed to distal stimuli in the environment. Proprioception, on the other hand, is generally sensitive to stimuli intrinsic to the body and thus usually refers to more proximal aspects of an action.
Based on these considerations, Hossner, Hegele, Erlacher and Ehrlenspiel (2006) investigated the influence of various attentional foci on performing the golf putt. They differentiated the foci’s distality to the intended action effect along the dimensions described above. Participants in their study always received combined instructions to focus their attention on performance- vs. effect-related aspects on the respective dimensions: „Feel vs. see (modal) the club grip vs. club head (spatial) at the moment you hit the ball vs. the turning point of your backswing (temporal).“ Results revealed a significant main effect for the factor spatial, i.e. the performance was better when attention was focused on the golf club’s head instead of the grip. This is in line with previous research supporting the importance of focussing attention on distal action features within a spatial frame of reference. Furthermore, within the more beneficial focus on the spatially distal club head, there was a significant disordinal interaction of the two remaining factors temporal and modal. When focusing on the club head, it was better to concentrate on kinesthetic feedback when hitting the ball, but also better to concentrate on visual feedback during the backswing. Another experiment aiming to explain the origin of this interaction effect showed that by manipulating situational aspects of the task, the disordinal interaction between the modal and the temporal dimensions disappeared.
In conclusion, even though Wulf (2007) offered a number of important insights, it might be beneficial to recognize distality in terms of effect vicinity along different dimensions. Albeit a distal focus of attention along the spatial dimension led to superior performance, there is still room for optimizing attentional control as evidenced by the interactive pattern between the temporal and modal dimensions. Thus, it seems as if there exist dependencies from contextual and task constraints. Together, those define a functional relationship between the induced attentional focus and the intended action effect within a multi-dimensional workspace. Careful analyses of task and context might be helpful to discover these functionalities a priori and subsequently optimize attentional guidance in motor learning and control beyond the current standards.
References
- Hossner, E.-J., Hegele, M., Erlacher, D., & Ehrlenspiel, F. (2006). Dimensions of distality: Spatial, temporal, and perceptual features of attentional control. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 28
- Jordan, M. I. (1996). Computational aspects of motor control and learning. In H. Heuer & S. W. Keele (Eds.) Handbook of Perception and Action: Motor Skills. New York: Academic Press.
- Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9(2), 129-154.
- McNevin, N.H., Shea, C.H., & Wulf, G. (2003). Increasing the distance of an external focus of attention enhances learning. Psychological Research, 67, 22-29.
- Vance, J., Wulf, G., Toellner, T., McNevin, N. H., & Mercer, J. (2004). EMG activity as a function of the performer’s focus of attention. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36(4), 450-459.
- Wulf, G., McNevin, N.H., Fuchs, T., Ritter, F., & Toole, T. (2000). Attentional focus in complex skill learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(3), 229-239.
