# Mental imagery and performance in aerobic, artistic, acrobatics, trampoline and tumbling, and rhythmic gymnasts: a systematic review

## TL;DR

This review examines how mental imagery affects performance in gymnasts, finding mixed results that depend on training methods and athlete factors.

## Contribution

A systematic review of mental imagery interventions in gymnastics, highlighting inconsistencies and factors influencing effectiveness.

## Key findings

- Imagery-based approaches sometimes improve gymnastics performance, but results are inconsistent.
- Performance benefits depend on athlete expertise, intervention design, and outcome measures.
- Most studies had methodological limitations, with few low-risk trials identified.

## Abstract

To identify and synthesize evidence on mental imagery (and imagery-based methods) in competitive gymnasts, evaluate effects on performance and relevant psychological/psychophysiological correlates, and appraise methodological quality and important intervention features.

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched. Eligible studies included competitive gymnasts from any FIG discipline examining imagery as an intervention/exposure or as an imagery construct associated with performance-relevant outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 for randomized studies and ROBINS-I for non-randomized/observational. Results were synthesized narratively by study design, imagery approach, and outcome domain.

Searches yielded 393 records; 258 unique records were screened; 46 full texts were assessed; and 16 studies were included. Interventions varied (script-based imagery, PETTLEP-informed imagery, video observation plus imagery, and multi-component psychological skills training). Several controlled/quasi-controlled studies reported improved gymnastics-related performance outcomes (judged skill execution or sport-specific performance indices) with imagery-based approaches, whereas others found no performance benefit despite improvements in psychological variables (e.g., self-confidence). Effects appeared moderated by expertise level, sequencing/dose, and outcome choice. Across RoB 2 studies, 0/8 (0%) were overall low risk, 4/8 (50%) had some concerns, and 4/8 (50%) were high risk, with the most frequent domain drivers being randomization process, outcome measurement, and selective reporting. Across ROBINS-I studies, 2/8 (25%) were moderate, 5/8 (62.5%) serious, and 1/8 (12.5%) critical, driven mainly by confounding, then outcome measurement and selective reporting.

Imagery is a potentially useful adjunct to gymnastics training, but effects are inconsistent and implementation- and athlete-dependent. Higher-quality, transparently reported trials using standardized, competition-relevant outcomes are needed.

Open Science Framework (osf/io/a9tj6; Date: 25/01/2026).