# Resolving the Centipede’s Dilemma: external focus distance and expertise in applied, continuous skills

**Authors:** Stephen Banks, Peter Higgins, John Sproule, Ursula Pool

PMC · DOI: 10.1007/s00426-024-01951-y · Psychological Research · 2024-04-04

## TL;DR

This paper explores how focusing on different distances during a continuous sport skill like kayaking affects performance, finding that a distant focus helps recreational athletes more than trained professionals.

## Contribution

The study introduces insights on how external focus distance impacts performance in continuous skills, varying by expertise level.

## Key findings

- Recreational kayakers performed faster with a distal focus on the finish line.
- Trained racers showed no significant performance difference with distal focus.
- A proximal focus on equipment negatively impacted performance for both groups.

## Abstract

Research has reliably demonstrated that an external focus of attention during skill production enhances performance, retention, and transfer relative to an internal focus on movement mechanics. The optimisation of external focus points, across a range of contexts and performers, is important for effective skill production. Two studies were conducted evaluating the impact of external focus distance in an applied, continuous sports skill (kayak sprinting) with participants of two different expertise levels. In Study 1, using a within-participants design, recreational kayakers (n = 20) were timed sprinting 75 m in a surf ski under proximal external focus, distal external focus, and control conditions. The distal focus (on the finish) (29.75 s) was significantly faster than both other trials (ps < 0.001). The control condition (30.95 s) was significantly faster than the proximal focus (on the boat) (32.37 s) (p = 0.003). The effect size was large (ηp2 = 0.55). In Study 2, specifically trained racers in sprint kayaks (K1s) (n = 16) were timed in a 100 m K1 sprint under the same three conditions as in Study 1. The control condition (28.96 s) was significantly faster than the proximal focus trial (29.83 s) (p = 0.02). The effect size was large (ηp2 = 0.23). There was no significant difference between the distal focus trial (29.03 s) and the other conditions. These findings suggest that focus distance can play a pivotal role in continuous skills. Whilst recreational performers may benefit immediately from a distal focus, this might not be the case for specifically trained athletes. Further, a proximal focus on fitted, passive equipment may be detrimental to performance.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** stroke (MESH:D020521), fatigue (MESH:D005221)
- **Chemicals:** carbon (MESH:D002244), water (MESH:D014867), Barton (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11282139/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11282139/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11282139