Table 2.
Study information for meta-analysed studies
| Meta-analysis | Study | Sport and sample | Level of performance | Psychological intervention | Intervention duration | Design | Performance outcome | Other outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I. PST vs control | ||||||||
| Barnicle and Burton [71] | Soccer; female; N = 19; age nr | University | PST program with focus on sources of enjoyment (goal setting, relaxation, self-talk) | Twelve 45-min sessions (total time approximately 9 h) | Controlled trial | Soccer goals and assists (O) | Sources of Enjoyment in Youth Sport Questionnaire (SEYSQ); Competitive Motivational Style Questionnaire (CMSQ); Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS-2); Sport Confidence Inventory (SCI), Test of Performance Strategies-2 (TOPS-2P) | |
| Blakeslee and Goff [75] | Equestrian sport; female; N = 17; mean age 19.41 years | University | PST program (relaxation, imagery, goal setting, self-talk) | One initial 2-h session and then weekly 30-min sessions for three weeks (total time 3.5 h) | RCT | Flat performance scores by competition judges (O)a; fences performance scores by competition judges (O)b | Credibility questions (including asking for adverse effects) | |
| Curry and Maniar [72] | Various sports (type of sports not specified); sex nr; N = 168; age nrc | University | Cognitive and behavioral academic course in performance enhancement (applied strategies for: arousal/affect control, identifying purpose, goal setting, imagery, sport confidence, trust, flow, sport nutrition, on-/off-field problem solving, self-esteem, life skill education on eating disorders and drug/alcohol abuse) | A 15-week peak performance course with a homework workbook of eight assignments (total time 30 h) | Controlled trial | Coach-rated performance (S) | Other coach-rated parameters; homework data; hope scale; self-esteem scale; sport confidence inventory | |
| Groslambert et al. [76] | Biathlon; male and female; N = 16; mean age 21.5 years | International | Imagery + autogenic training | Two 30-min sessions/week during 6 weeks (total time 12 h) | RCT | Biathlon shooting performance (O)a; shooting tremor (O)b | Heart rate | |
| Kress et al. [77] | Cycling; male; N = 11; mean age 28.8 years | Regional | Stress inoculation training | 1-h seminar of stress inoculation training followed by a week of participants practicing the skills on their own | RCT | Cycling performance times (ergometer cycle) (O) | Blood lactate level | |
| Lohr and Scogin [73] | Cross-country, basketball, track and field, golf, gymnastics, tennis, diving; male and female; N = 47; mean age 20.35 years | University | VMBR (self-administered) | An 18-day training program encouraged to be completed in 4 weeks: athletes received material in the form of a 42-page training manual, relaxation audiotape, and a visualization videotape | Controlled trial | Objective performance: times in competition (cross-country), shooting performance in practice (basketball), team statistics of “nine hole average” (golf), statistics from practice (track and field), serve performance (tennis), statistics from competition (gymnastics and diving). Subjective performance: coach-rated performancea, self-rated performanceb | Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT); visual imagery questionnaire (imagery ability) | |
| Thelwell and Maynard [74] | Cricket; male; N = 16; mean age 20.9 years | County/regional | PST program (goal setting, activation regulation strategies, self-talk, relaxation, imagery, concentration) | Twelve weekly sessions of 1 h (total time 12 h) | Controlled trial | For batters, runs scored, for bowlers, number of wickets taken in an innings (O)a; coach-rated performance (S)b | Credibility questions; qualitative data (interviews); modified version of the Mental Skills Questionnaire (mental skills use) | |
| II. MA vs control | ||||||||
| Glass et al. [63] | Various sports; male and female; N = 57; mean age 19.32 years | University | Mindfulness sport performance enhancement | Six weekly sessions of 75 min (total time 7.5 h) | RCT | Coach rating of overall performance (S)a; self-rating of overall performance (S)b | Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS-21); Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS); Five Facet of Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ); Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II); Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (DFS-2); Sport Anxiety Scale; Sport Rating Form (SRF); Coach’s Rating Form (CRF); mindfulness practice log and enjoyment rating | |
| John et al. [61] | Shooting; male; N = 110; mean age 29.5 years | National | Mindfulness meditation therapy | 20-min sessions six times/week for 4 weeks (total of 24 sessions; total time 8 h) | RCT | Shooting performance (O) | Salivary cortisol as a measure of pre-competition anxiety | |
| Jones et al. [79] | Rowing; female; N = 27; age range 18–23 years | University | Mindfulness-based stress reduction | Six 75-min sessions over 6 weeks (intervention continued for 2 more sessions after post-assessment of ergometer performance) | RCT | Ergometer rowing time (O) | Athletic Coping Skills Inventory-28; Beck Anxiety Inventory; Beck Depression Inventory-II; Epworth Sleepiness Scale; Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; Perceived Stress Scale; Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index; Ruminative Responses Scale; Scales of Psychological Well-Being; objective sleep measures via actigraph | |
| Ruiz and Luciano [62] | Chess; male; N = 10; age range 23–50 years | International | Acceptance and commitment therapy | 2–3 sessions (4 h total for all) | Controlled trial | Elo rating of chess performance (O) | Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II (AAQ–II); Chess Counterproductive reactions Questionnaire (CCRQ); rating of believability and interference of private events | |
| Solberg et al. [78] | Shooting; male and female; N = 25; age range 18–46 years | Regional | Meditation (ACEM meditation) | Seven weekly sessions, and also encouraged to home practice for 30 min daily during the intervention | RCT | Shooting performance scores, in competition (O)a and in test shooting (O)b | Correlation between self-reported tension and test shooting performance | |
| Zadeh et al. [64] | Soccer; male; N = 44; mean age 24.15 years | Provincial | Mindfulness acceptance commitment approach | Seven weekly 45 min sessions (total time 5 h 15 min) + audio mindfulness exercises 3 days a week | RCT | Coach and expert ratings of individual performance (S)a and team performance (S)b | Injury occurrence and severity; Mindful Sport Performance Questionnaire | |
| III. Imagery vs control | ||||||||
| Fontani et al. [65] | Karate; male; N = 30; mean age 35 years | National | Imagery (motor) | Daily imagery training for 16 min (120 trials) during 30 days | Controlled trial (imagery vs action trained control vs non-trained control) | Start reaction time (O)a; impact reaction time (O)b | Electromyography muscle activation; punch power and strength; movement-related brain macropotentials | |
| Lu et al. [66] | Basketball; male and female; N = 49; mean age 20.5 years | University | Imagery (PETTLEP, externale vs internale) | Prior to performance | Controlled trial (two experimental conditions and one control) | Basketball 3-point shooting (O) | The revised Chinese version of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-Revised (MIQ-R); credibility questions | |
| Rhodes et al. [82] | Soccer; male; N = 30; mean age 24.3 years | National | Imagery (PETTLEP)e vs functional imagery traininge | 3 sessions during 1 week (PETTLEP); 1 group session followed by daily implementation cues during 1 week (functional imagery training) | RCT (two experimental conditions and one control) | Soccer penalty kick (O) | Visual imagery vividness | |
| Robin et al. [81] | Basketball; sex nr; N = 36; mean age 19.53 years | Regional | Dynamic motor imagerye vs dynamic motor imagery + video model observatione | 30-min weekly session for five weeks (for both experimental conditions) | RCT (two experimental conditions and one control) | Basketball free throw shooting (O)a; free throw shooting including sprints [Evan Fournier Test] (O)b | Imagery vividness | |
| Seif-Barghi et al. [80] | Soccer; male; N = 17c; mean age 25.57 years | National | Imagery | Eight weekly sessions of 10–15 min (total time 80–120 min), participants were also encouraged to practice on a daily basis | RCT | Soccer passing performance (O) | None | |
| IV. Attentional: external vs internal | ||||||||
| Castaneda and Gray [85] | Baseball; male; N = 8c; mean age 19.5 years | University | Attentional focus intervention (skill/internal focuse1; skill/external focuse1; environmental/external focuse2; environmental/irrelevant focuse2) | Instructions prior to performance | Latin square counterbalanced crossover design with four experimental and one control condition | Mean temporal swing error in a baseball simulator (O) | Response accuracy of directing attention to the intended location | |
| Gray [86] | Baseball; sex nr; N = 10c; age nr | University | Attentional (internal/skill focus vs external/extraneous) | Instructions prior to performance | Crossover design with baseline followed by two counterbalanced experimental conditions | Mean temporal swing error in a baseball simulator (O) | Batting kinematics; secondary task (attentional) performance | |
| Koedijker et al. [87] | Table tennis, sex nr; N = 15c; mean age 19.1 years | Regional | Attentional (skill-focused/internal vs dual-task/extraneous-external) | Instructions prior to performance | Crossover design with threea counterbalanced conditions (two experimental, one control) | Table tennis forehand performance (O) | Secondary task (attentional) performance; Slowed and speeded serve conditions (not related to attentional manipulations) | |
| Neumann and Thomas [67] | Golf; male and female; N = 16c; age nrc | State, national | Attentional (internal)d; attentional (external)d; goal setting (internal)d; goal setting (external)d | Instructions prior to performance | Crossover design with baseline followed by four counterbalanced experimental conditions | Golf putting performance (O) | Psychophysiological measures (heart rate; heart rate variability; respiratory frequency) | |
| IV. Regulatory focus instructions: prevention vs promotion | ||||||||
| Kacperski and Kutzner [90] | Table tennis; male and female; N = 39; mean age 30.07 years | Regional | Regulatory focus instructions (promotion vs prevention) | Instructions prior to performance | Crossover design with baseline followed by two counterbalanced experimental conditions | Winner of the match (O)a; winner of the first point after intervention instructions (O)b | Chronic regulatory focus orientation (adapted version of the Lockwood Scale); playing style (offensive/defensive) | |
| Vogel and Genschow [91] | Soccer; male; N = 20; mean age 22.7 years | Regional | Regulatory focus instructions (promotion vs prevention) | Instructions prior to performance | Counterbalanced crossover design with two experimental conditions | Scored soccer goals, penalties (11 m)a and free-kicks (17 m)b [O] | Chronic regulatory focus orientation (adapted version of the Lockwood Scale); coach-rated penalty and free-kick shooting ability (rated prior to performance) | |
| Wegner et al. [89] | Volleyball; male; N = 40; mean age 30 years | Regional | Regulatory focus instructions (promotion vs prevention) | Instructions prior to performance | Randomized crossover design with baseline followed by three counterbalanced conditions (two experimental, one control) | Volleyball service return (O)a; volleyball smash return (O)b | Chronic regulatory focus orientation (the Lockwood Scale) | |
hr hours, MA mindfulness- and acceptance-based approaches, min minutes, O objective performance measure, nr not reported, PETTLEP [imagery model] physical, environment, task, timing, learning, emotion, perspective, PST psychological skills training, S subjective performance measure, RCT randomized controlled trial, VMBR visuo-motor behavior rehearsal
aOutcome a in the meta-analysis
bOutcome b in the meta-analysis
cAdditional study characteristics exist that did not meet eligibility criteria
dConditions had other names in the article but are renamed to make the intervention content and comparison between studies clearer
eGroups were combined in the meta-analysis