Attentional focusing in running: Implicit focus manipulations reflect the effects for explicit instructions

Numerous studies exhibit detrimental effects of an internal focus of attention compared to an external focus in terms of running economy. The instructions to manipulate attentional focus are primarily explicit. This study compares explicit verbal (top-down) and natural implicit (bottom-up) focus manipulations, assuming that they present different ways of information processing. Forty trained runners completed a 36-min-run focusing internally (running movement) and externally (video). Both foci were explicitly manipulated through instructions and implicitly by creating situations where participants unconsciously adopted the required focus. Between each manipulated condition participants ran 5?min without any instruction. Oxygen consumption was assessed via spiroergometry. Results revealed a main effect of focus (lower VO2 values for both external conditions) with F(1,39)(?)=?7.40, p?=?.01 and ?(2)(?)(p)=?.16, but no main effect of instruction type and no interaction effect. This finding strengthens the detrimental effect of an internal focus compared to an external focus regardless of the instruction type.

Automated summary

This study found that focusing externally has a more positive effect on running economy compared to an internal focus, regardless of whether the focus is manipulated through explicit verbal instructions or natural implicit methods. Participants showed lower oxygen consumption when unconsciously adopting the required focus.