HÖGSKOLAN I HALMSTAD Tel vx 035 - 16 71 00 Besöksadress:
Box 823 Tel direkt 035 - 16 7…… Kristian IV:s väg 3
301 18 HALMSTAD Telefax 035 - 14 85 33 Pg 788129 - 5
DEVELOPMENT OF ICE HOCKEY PLAYERS’ IMAGERY EXPERIENCES A LONGITUDINAL STUDY
Halmstad University
School of Social and Health Sciences Author:
Sport Psychology, 90 – 120 ects, Spring 2009 Mikael Wallsbeck Supervisor: Natalia Stambulova
Co Supervisor: Fredrik Weibull Examinator: Urban Johnson
Wallsbeck, M. (2009). The development of ice hockey players’ imagery experiences. A
longitudinal study. (D– essay in sport psychology, 90 – 120 ects). School of Social and Health Sciences. Halmstad university.
The development of imagery has been found in intervention studies. No previous study was found with the purpose of the development of imagery experiences without the influence of an intervention. Therefore the present paper monitored five ice hockey players’ imagery experiences during a season and examined the following objectives: a) The dynamicity and stability of the ice hockey players’ imagery patterns; b) The factors influencing the
development of ice hockey players’ imagery experiences; c) Individual differences concerning the imagery experiences. A combination between qualitative and quantitative methods was used in the study. The results showed that the players experienced both stable and dynamic imagery patterns. Based on the Action theory (Nitsch, 1985), personal, environmental and performance/task factors were shown to influence the stability and dynamicity of the players’ idiosyncratic imagery experiences. The results of this study show why imagery experiences are changed and offer great implications to applied work.
Key words: action theory, development, ice hockey players’, imagery, imagery pattern.
Wallsbeck, M. (2009). Utvecklingen av ishockeyspelares visualiseringsupplevelser. En longitudinell studie.(D-uppsats i psykologi inriktning idrott, 90 – 120 hp). Sektionen för Hälsa och Samhälle: Högskolan i Halmstad.
Forskning har visat att visualisering kan vara dynamisk över tid. Ingen studie har dock hittats som studera dynamiken av visualisering utan påverkan av en intervention. Denna studie undersökte därför fem ishockeyspelares visualiseringsupplevelser under en säsong utan påverkan av en intervention med följande syften: a) dynamiken och stabiliteten hos ishockeyspelarnas visualiseringsmönster; b) vilka faktorer som påverkar utvecklingen av visualiseringsupplevelserna; c) individuella skillnader i visualiseringsupplevelserna. En kombination av kvalitativ och kvantitativ metod behandlades i studien. Resultatet visade att visualiseringsmönstrern upplevdes vara stabila och dynamiska över tid. Utifrån Action Theory (Nitsch, 1985) visade studien att personliga, miljö- och prestations/uppgiftsfaktorer påverkade stabiliteten i spelarnas visualiseringsupplevelser. Resultatet från denna studie visar varför visualiseringsupplevelserna förändrades över tid och är en fördelaktig kunskap för
idrottspsykologer att tillämpa i det pratiska arbetet med visualisering.
Nyckelord: action theory, dynamic, ishockey, visualisering, visualiseringsmönster.
Introduction
“I want to create as much positive around imagery as possible, even if negative images appear” This is a quotation from one of the eleven ice hockey players that participated in Wallsbeck’s (2008) study on imagery experiences. The quotation answers the question what the player wanted to improve with his imagery. This quotation focusing on making the players’ imagery experience more positive and replace spontaneous negative images with voluntary positive images. This created an interest in monitoring and following the
experiences of imagery among the players through a season from October 2008 until March 2009, to see if the players changed their imagery experiences and if they were able to get it more positive and more controlled in order to decrease the negative imagery experiences.
Development of imagery has been shown by the influence of the sport psychologist and the work of long interventions (Cumming, Hall, & Shambrock, 2004) and short interventions (Callow & Waters, 2005). No previous research has been found on the development of imagery experience over time without the influence of intervention. Therefore this paper presents five ice hockey players’ development of imagery experiences during a season, without the influence of an intervention. The development of imagery experiences is examined based on the Analytic Framework of Imagery Experiences and discussed from a personal, environmental and task perspective based on the Action Theory (Nitsch, 1985).
Below, definitions will be presented to clarify the terms imagery, imagery ability and imagery experiences that are discussed in this paper.
Definitions of key terms Imagery
There are several definitions of imagery in the literature that tries to capture the essence of imagery. The definition of Morris, Spittle and Watt (2005) modified by Weibull (2006) is used in this study:
“Imagery, in the context of sport, may be considered as the voluntary or spontaneous creation or re-creation of an experience generated from memorial information, involving quasi-
sensorial, quasi-perceptional, and quasi-affective characteristics which may occur in the absence of the real stimulus antecedents normally associated with the actual experience and which may have physiological and psychological effects on the image” (Weibull, 2006, pp.
92-93).
Imagery ability
Imagery ability is a term with many factors and is difficult to define. The definition presented in this study captures the factors influencing imagery ability and is therefore used in the present study. “An individuals capacity of forming vivid, controllable images and retaining them for sufficient time to effect the desired imagery rehearsal” (Morris, 1997, p. 37).
Imagery experiences
Imagery can be experienced voluntarily or spontaneously. Voluntary imagery is used to serve one or several functions. For example an athlete that imagined a nice tackle might do that to enhance his or her self-confidence. Voluntary imagery can also have negative effects, e.g.
when the athlete fails to form the preferred image. Spontaneous imagery is experienced spontaneously and the function is more a result of the image that is created. One individual might experience one image of winning the competition. The athlete did not expect this image to occur but it has positive effects on the athlete’s self-confidence. Spontaneous images can also have negative effects when the athlete might experience an image of for example missing the goal, and therefore has negative perceived effects for the athlete on for example self- confidence.
Theoretical frameworks
A mile-stone in the history of imagery research is the work of Paivio from 1985. He suggested that imagery serves both motivational and cognitive functions. Paivio (1985) presented that an image can be either specific or general for the individual. Influenced by Paivio (1985), Hall, Mack, Paivio and Hausenblas (1998) created the Sport Imagery Questionnaire (SIQ). The questionnaire examines the imagery use among athletes, and analyzes the data from five imagery functions. Based on the work with the SIQ, these five imagery functions are presented in the “Applied Model of Imagery Use” by Martin, Moritz and Hall (1999). The five imagery functions are: Motivational Specific (MS): images of specific goals, such as image yourself winning the game; Motivational General-Mastery (MG-M): images that represent different coping strategies; Motivational General-Arousal (MG-A): images that include the feeling of e.g., stress, anxiety or arousal; Cognitive Specific (CS): images of specific sport skills, e.g., an image of scoring a goal and the last type Cognitive General (CG):
for example strategic images of how the team should play. Martin and colleagues (1999) further discussed the situation when athletes use imagery (e.g., in practice, competition and rehabilitation) and the imagery ability among athletes in terms of how they use imagery (e.g., perspective, modalities). There are some limitations with this model that are discussed by Short, Ross-Stewart and Monsma (2005) in their article. That the Applied model of imagery use connects a certain imagery type to a specific function and that one imagery type only can serve one function. Short and colleagues (2005) further discussed that athletes experience images that can’t be categorized into one of the five imagery types suggested by Hall and colleagues (1998). In addition to this, the qualitative studies in the area of imagery are more frequently used. Munroe, Giacobbi, Hall and Weinberg (2000) developed the framework of the four Ws in imagery use. Which is a qualitative framework where they examined imagery use from the four Ws: Where (e.g., competition or practice), When (e.g., before competition), Why (e.g., imagery type) and What (e.g., senses). Although Munroe and colleagues (2000) included the five imagery functions (e.g., CG) this framework created sub-categories in each of the five functions, which show that imagery can be used for more specific functions. These frameworks such as Paivios’ (1985) and Martin and colleagues’ (1999) model and especially the work with the SIQ (Hall, et al., 1998) have been used frequently in studies, structuring the imagery experiences into a given type serving a given function. Studies have found that there is no one to one relationship between imagery type and imagery function (e.g., Cumming, et al., 2005). Moreover the term imagery use needs to be considered. The term has been used in earlier frameworks and models and is not as broad as the term imagery experiences. For instance, imagery use does not include the experience of spontaneous images in the same way as the term imagery experiences. Athletes do not use spontaneous imagery they experience it.
The Analytic Framework of Imagery Experiences are used in this study in order to examine imagery experiences in an open qualitative way, followed by structuring the data in
idiosyncratic imagery patterns into the given context.
Analytic framework of imagery experiences
The Analytic Framework of Imagery Experiences is developed based on the research using the Individual Profile of Imagery Experiences in Tennis (IPIET: Weibull, 2005, 2007a, 2007b) and the Individual Profile of Imagery Experiences in Sport (IPIES; Weibull, 2008a).
The framework is an idiosyncratic way of examining individual imagery experiences. An individual’s imagery experiences can be broken down into smaller units called imagery patterns. An imagery pattern is a concrete idiosyncratic imagery experience, which is
multidimensional in terms of content, purposes, senses, perspectives, emotions, frequency and effect, related to a certain context. The term “multidimensional” includes the interaction
between the dimensions. The interaction between the dimensions is important to consider in understanding the term imagery patterns. An imagery pattern may be experienced either voluntarily or spontaneously and has either positive, negative or no perceived effects (Weibull, 2008b). Imagery patterns can change over time, new imagery patterns can be created and they can cease to be (Weibull, 2006). Imagery patterns are generally experienced individually but certain characteristics of imagery patterns can be shared by several
individuals, e.g., context and purpose (Weibull, 2005). Athletes can experience one or several imagery patterns. The imagery pattern/s form the individual’s idiosyncratic imagery profile.
Action theory
Different factors might influence the athletes’ experiences of imagery over time and therefore the action theory approach (Nitsch, 1985) is used in this study. This approach suggests that the actions of humans are based on the dynamic relationship between a person and his or her environment and the given task. This approach has also been used in applied work (e.g., Hackfort & Munzert, 2005). More specifically, the personal characteristics can change together with the environment and this relationship between the person and his or her environment is important in life in general. This relationship can also be influenced by the given task and especially in elite performance where the task is very important and the person needs to adjust to the task together with the environment (Hackfort, 2006). This relationship should be adjusted when: a) the interaction that exists no longer can meet the needs for the subject; b) another relationship is perceived elsewhere; or c) when the given state ceases to exist. These subjective cognitive interpretations are used to match the given task and are important to consider for athletes. So optimizing the person-environment relationship is important in the development of all preferred actions (Nitsch, 2000).
Previous research
Imagery experiences among athletes
Studies on imagery experiences among athletes have found that athletes tend to experience imagery more in the context of competition than in practice (e.g., Gregg, Hall, & Hanton, 2007). More specifically, MacIntyre and Moran (2007) found that canoe-slalom athletes used imagery as a part of their performance routine before competition. Concerning general use studies have found, high level athletes to use more imagery compared to low level athletes (Cumming & Hall, 2002). Furthermore, concerning the differences in the use of imagery among athletes, Moritz, Hall, Martin and Vadocz (1996) suggested that athletes with high confidence use imagery in a more controlled way and more effectively than athletes with low confidence. However imagery can be experienced in many ways by individuals. One way to use imagery is in conjunction to physical practice which is recommended by Feltz and Landers (1983) in their meta-analysis. To use imagery in conjunction to physical practice is not only recommended, research have found that there are some relations between imagery and real physical practice. Decety (1996) found that imagery and real motor movements share the same pathway in the brain. This was called functional equivalent by Moran (1996).
Studies have found functional equivalent imagery to be effective (Callow, Roberts, & Fawkes, 2006) and enjoyable (Blair, Hall, & Leyshon, 1993).
When athletes use imagery, they can use one imagery type for several functions (e.g., Nordin
& Cumming, 2005). For example, one athlete can image a golf swing in order to both enhance self-confidence and to stay motivated. Orlick and Partington (1988) presented several
functions for using imagery among athletes: strategy, goal setting, enhance self-confidence, improve concentration, reduce anxiety and enhance quality of training. Imagery can also be
experienced without a given function as in spontaneous imagery. Spontaneous imagery that is experienced for no specific reason (Murphy, Cumming, & Nordin, 2008) has also been
reported to have positive effects (e.g., Nordin & Cumming, 2005). Although what the positive effect is connected to is not clear because the image is not created to serve a given function.
This can be the reason that dancers in Nordin and Cumming’s (2005) study reported that they wanted to make their spontaneous images more voluntarily controlled in order to facilitate the effect of their imagery. By using more voluntarily controlled images, this might minimize the experience of spontaneous imagery with negative effects (Smith & Holmes, 2004; Nordin &
Cumming, 2005).
Imagery ability
In order to continue the discussion about voluntary and spontaneous imagery, some aspects of imagery ability are presented. Gerard (1961) suggested that the main goal for imagery
development is to have controlled voluntary images, and not be disturbed by spontaneous images. To control imagery, the individual needs to have the ability to do so. Everybody can use imagery but there are individual differences in the ability to create and control these images (Martin, et al., 1999). These individual differences are important to consider when examining how individuals experience imagery and there are several variables that might influence the relationship between imagery and performance (Hinshaw, 1992). Gates,
Depalma and Shelley (2003) suggest that factors like the task and the skill level of the athlete might influence the athletes’ use of imagery. Hinshaw (1992) suggests in her article that if we only study one variable at a time, we will never explain this relationship.
No previous research was found that examined the dynamicity and stability of imagery experiences. Even though the dynamicity and stability of imagery without the influence of an intervention not have been the purpose of any study, imagery has been shown to change over time. Nicholls and colleagues (2004) reported an increase in imagery ability as an effect of their intervention. Without any influence of intervention, Cumming and colleagues (2004) found that the athletes used imagery depending on the athletes’ confidence and how the team performed. When the team performed poorly, the athlete had a lack of confidence and could not create an image of the team winning. These results demonstrate that imagery is dynamic over time. Another factor that has been shown to influence imagery is feedback in relation to imagery. In Minas (1978) study using experimental design, she found that the group which trained imagery without the experts’ feedback performed worse than the control group without any imagery training. More recently Nordin and Cumming (2006) found individual differences in imagery experiences between dancers depending on the amount of
encouragement they received in relation to their imagery use. These studies can support that there is more than one factor influencing the imagery ability.
Research based on Analytic framework of imagery experiences
Previous research using the Analytic framework of imagery experiences has been conducted in soccer (Dahl & Nilsson, 2008), bowling (Björkander & Quist, 2008), golf (Olsson, 2008), tennis (Weibull, 2005; 2006; 2007) and ice hockey (Wallsbeck, 2008). All these studies support that one imagery type can be used for several functions. The most common purposes reported for the voluntary imagery patterns in these studies were: finding the right feeling, positive feeling, enhancing self-confidence, technique and concentration. The content of the imagery patterns reported by the athletes in these studies were idiosyncratic. Furthermore athletes in all five sports experienced spontaneous imagery patterns with negative effects.
Golf players (Olsson, 2008), tennis players (Weibull, 2005), and ice hockey players (Wallsbeck, 2008) also reported spontaneous imagery patterns with positive effects. The
Analytic framework of imagery experiences have also been used in an intervention study (Weibull, 2006), in which development in changeability of imagery patterns was confirmed.
Some imagery patterns in this study changed and new were created. The negative effects of the spontaneous negative imagery patterns decreased after the intervention. Some changes were also found in the imagery patterns from the baseline assessment in October to the pre- intervention assessment in January, before the intervention started.
Research conducted with this analytic framework examined the idiosyncratic imagery experiences of athletes. Although the reasons for the development of athletes imagery experiences has not been presented in any paper. It is found that interventions affect the imagery use of the athlete (Nicholls, et al., 2004) and also that other factors might influence the use (Gates, et al., 2003). Therefore it would be interesting to examine which factors might influence athletes’ imagery experiences during a season without any intervention. By
monitoring elite ice hockey players’ imagery experiences during a season the present study examined:
a) The dynamicity and stability of ice hockey players’ imagery patterns.
b) The factors influencing the development of ice hockey players’ imagery experiences.
c) Individual differences concerning the imagery experiences.
Method Participants
Five Swedish elite ice hockey players, all men, participated in this study. The hockey players had a mean age of 24.8 (sd, 4.4) years and they had played ice hockey on average for 18.2 (sd, 5.4) years.
Instrument
The instrument called Individual Profile of Imagery Experience in Sport (IPIES; Weibull, 2008; Appendix 8) was developed from the Individual Profile of Imagery Experiences in Tennis (IPIET; Weibull, 2005, 2006, 2007a, 2007b). IPIES is based on the Conceptual framework for athletes’ use of Imagery (Munroe, et al., 2000) and Model of key elements of an imagery training program (Morris, et al., 2005). IPIES is used to examine athletes’ imagery experiences. The instrument consists of four parts. The first part includes background questions (e.g., age and competitive level). In the second part the players’ understanding of imagery is examined. This second part includes one open and one structured question. In the structured question the athletes select three definitions (e.g., “imagery may have physiological and psychological effects”) closest to their understanding of the imagery concept.In the third part the players’ imagery experiences are examined. It involves two sections such as 3A voluntary imagery and 3B spontaneous imagery. These are divided into six dimensions but 3B do not have the dimension why because spontaneous imagery do not have a given purpose.
The dimensions are context (where and when they use imagery); content (the content of the imagery); purpose (e.g., improve concentration); how (e.g., senses and perspectives included);
frequency (how often they use the specific imagery pattern in the specific context) and effect (the perceived effect of the specific imagery in the specific context). The frequency is assessed trough how often the athletes experience the different imagery patterns in each specific context on a 10-point scale (1 = very seldom, 10 = very often). The imagery patterns can have both a negative and positive effect. The effect is assessed using a negative 10-point scale (-10 = very negative effect, -1= low negative effect) and a positive 10-point scale (1 = low positive effect, 10 = very high positive effect). An imagery pattern can be perceived to have no effect and are then rated as 0 on the effect scale. The fourth part begins with an evaluation of which senses the athletes use. Then there are four scales that examine the
athletes’ imagery control, visual clarity and how strong emotions and kinesthetic feelings they experience in their imagery. Finally, there is another question about the athletes’ development in imagery. The final question is about the players’ perceived need to improve their imagery ability/use. For the other part of the measurement, an interview guide was developed by the author and the supervisors of the study. The interview guide was semi structured and included six open questions: Generally, how your imagery experiences look like today compared to the last interview? Which are the biggest changes according to you? What’s your opinion about this specific change? How has your imagery experiences been affected from the last
interview? Why has that affected you? These questions were designed in order to stimulate the athlete to describe in an open way why their imagery patterns were stable or had changed.
Procedure
Eleven ice hockey players participated in the first measurement of imagery experience in October 2008 presented in Wallsbeck’s (2008) study. Out of the eleven players, five players were asked by the author to participate in the present study. A criterion to participate in this study was that the players experienced imagery in relation to ice hockey. This criterion excluded one player from participating in the study, because he reported no imagery
experiences in the interview in Wallsbeck (2008) study. A second criterion was that the player still played in the team and this excluded four players. Two players from the first
measurement were traded to other teams, and did not play for the team anymore. Two players got injured during the beginning of the season and were therefore not asked to participate. The final criterion to participate in the present study was that the player used voluntary imagery.
This excluded one player which only experienced spontaneous imagery. The five remaining players were all asked and agreed to participate in the study. They all signed a new written consent form and were informed verbally about the purpose of the study and the relevant ethical issues (e.g., that they were able to withdraw from the study without any
consequences).
The interviews with the five players in Wallsbecks (2008) study were seen as a baseline measure in this present study. In this baseline measure the interview guide from this study was not included. Fifteen follow up interviews were then conducted for the present study using a combination of the IPIES and the interview guide. Each one of the five players was interviewed three times in the beginning of: January, February and March 2009. Each interview was tape recorded and transcribed into written text. The interviews varied from 12 to 37 minutes and the interviews were conducted in the home arena for the players. During the interviews each player was presented the imagery profile from the last interview (see
Appendix 4-8). Then they were asked to report if there were any changes in the dimensions of their imagery patterns (e.g., content, frequency), if new imagery patterns had been created or if one or several imagery patterns had ceased to exist. If there were changes in the profiles these changes were filled in together with the author, and a new imagery profile for the player was formed. This new imagery profile was then used in the next interview to report changes.
If no changes were reported the imagery patterns and the whole imagery profile stayed the same. The dialogue between the author and the players about the stability and dynamicity of the imagery patterns were seen as important in the interview. The players were also told to ask if there was something they did not understand. In the end of the last interview, the author presented the players’ four imagery profiles that had emerged during the season (see
Appendix 4-8). This was done to make sure that the imagery profiles were correct and to see if the players felt that something was missing.
Data analyze
The data for this study was analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative method. The quantitative analysis was used to compare the imagery patterns between the measurements.
The qualitative way was used to analyze the data from the transcribed interviews. These two types of analysis will be presented below.
Quantitative analyze
The first step of the data analyze was to organize the players’ imagery experiences into imagery patterns and its six dimensions: context, content, purposes, how, frequency and effects. Then the imagery patterns for each player at each measurement were structured into the players’ idiosyncratic imagery profile, which means that a new imagery profile was formed at each measurement. Each player in this study designed four imagery profiles, see Appendix 4-8. These imagery profiles were then compared, for example, the imagery profile from the first interview were compared to the imagery profile that emerged in the second interview. If there were any changes in the profile these changes are marked bold in the imagery profile in Appendix 4-8. All imagery patterns reported in this study were analyzed using the formula of content overlap (Krahè, 1986). No distinctions were made between spontaneous and voluntary imagery patterns; they were analyzed in the same way. Krahè (1986) used this formula to examine behavioral that is coherence across situations and the content overlap was defined by the number of features the situations shared in relation to the total number of features for the two situations together using this formula:
r(i, j)= nc (i,j)__
√ n (i) × n(j)
To clarify the formula the concepts are described such as, r(i, j) = similarity between situations i and j: varies between 0 and 1; nc (i,j) = number of shared features for situation i and j; n(i) = numbers of features for situation i; n (j) = number of features for situation j.
The content overlap can vary between 1.0 (100 % content overlap) to 0.0 (no content overlap). This formula has also been used in the field of sport psychology. Hanin and
Stambulova (2002) used this method when they analyzed metaphors describing athletes best and worst ever performance. In this study the content overlap method was used to analyze the stability of each imagery pattern over the four measurements, looking at the six dimensions of IPIES: context, content, purposes, how, frequency and effects. If all six dimensions were exactly the same over all four measurements the content overlap was 1.0. If one dimension had changed from one measure to another, the content overlap was lower than 1.0 and so forth. If the player changed one sense the whole dimension of how was changed. In this part of the analysis, no attention was paid to how big or small the change was in the dimension of how, frequency or effect. If there was a change the whole dimension was changed. The present study consists of four interviews with each player. For each imagery pattern there were three potential content overlaps: from the first interview to the second, from the second to the third and from the third to the fourth interview. Each imagery pattern was analyzed separately from the value of the three content overlaps. Then all the three content overlaps were put together and divided in three which created a mean for the total content overlap for each imagery pattern (Appendix 1). The imagery patterns were then separated into four groups: stable imagery patterns, dynamic imagery patterns, new imagery patterns and imagery patterns that ceased to exist. These groups of new imagery patterns and ceased to exist imagery patterns were categorized into the dynamic imagery group so that two bigger groups of stable and dynamic imagery patterns could be presented. If the total content overlap over all the three measurements for the imagery pattern was 1.0 the pattern were reported as stable, the imagery
patterns were only categorized as stable if all the six dimensions in the imagery pattern were exactly the same over all three measurements. If the imagery pattern had a content overlap between 0.0 and 1.0 and was reported by the player in all measurement, the imagery pattern was categorized as dynamic imagery pattern. Some imagery patterns were not reported in all three measurements. If an imagery pattern was reported in measurement two, the content overlap for the imagery pattern from the first measurement was 0.0. If the imagery pattern did not have a value of content overlap in one or two of the measurements the imagery pattern was interpreted as being either new created or that the imagery pattern that had ceased to exist.
Qualitative analyze
The qualitative data was analyzed using a deductive and inductive analyze with quantification of raw data units in themes and categories. The interviews were analyzed and there were no distinctions made between voluntary and spontaneous imagery experiences in the data analysis. To give a more general description the transcribed data was first organized into the four categories (i.e., stable imagery patterns, dynamic imagery patterns, new imagery patterns, imagery patterns that ceased to exist) based on the question the data was answering. For example if the data reflected why the player had created a new imagery pattern this raw data unit was placed in the category of new imagery patterns created. Then the raw data units for stable and dynamic imagery patterns were categorized into personal, environmental and task/performance from the action theory approach (Nitsch, 1985). The two subgroups of new and ceased to exist imagery patterns were presented separately in the group of dynamic imagery patterns. This was done because of the small amount of imagery patterns that were new or had ceased to exist and to categorize this part of the results into category profiles was not seen as favorable.
Results
In total, the five ice hockey players in this study reported the experience of 37 idiosyncratic imagery patterns, although some imagery patterns shared some dimensions e.g., content and purpose. Out of these idiosyncratic imagery patterns 27 imagery patterns were experienced voluntarily and 10 imagery patterns were experienced spontaneously. All imagery patterns were numbered from imagery pattern number one to imagery patterns number 37 (Appendix 1). The quantitative results from the content overlaps are presented first in order to show the stability and dynamicity of the imagery patterns. Then the qualitative data from the interviews will be analyzed focusing on the factors influencing the stability and dynamicity of the
imagery patterns. Finally the individual differences between the players’ imagery experiences will be presented.
Stability and dynamicity of imagery patterns
After analyzing the results with the content overlap four different categories emerged: stable imagery patterns, dynamic imagery patterns, new imagery patterns and imagery patterns that ceased to exist. Twelve imagery patterns were stable and had a total content overlap of 1.0 over the three measurements. All the six dimensions (e.g., content) were all the same during all three measurements in these stable imagery patterns. Twenty-one imagery patterns were dynamic and had a total content overlap that varied from 0.93 down to 0.66. The changes in the imagery patterns were mostly reported in the dimensions frequency and effect. No changes were reported in the dimensions content and purpose. Two imagery patterns were changed in the dimension how when the player started to include emotions in his imagery patterns. Four new imagery patterns were created (imagery patterns number 32, 6, 37 and 26) in total by the five players during the period of the study. Imagery patterns number 37 and number 32 had a
content overlap of 0.0. Imagery pattern number 6 was reported in the second interview and was then stable over the season. Imagery pattern number 26 was reported in the second measurement and had a content overlap to measurement three of 1.0. One imagery pattern ceased to exist in this study, it was imagery pattern number 32. The pattern was created at the second measurement and was reported at the third measurement to be ceased to exist. A summary of the imagery patterns are presented in Table 1 below.
Table 1
Number of stable, dynamic, new and imagery patterns that ceased to exist.
Factors influencing the stability and dynamicity of imagery patterns
The qualitative data from the stable and dynamic imagery patterns are analyzed based on the pre-determined categories from the action theory, such as personal, environmental and
performance/task factors. The results are structured into six category profiles: Personal factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns, Environmental factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns, Performance/task factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns, Personal factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns, Environmental factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns and Performance/task factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns (see Appendix 2). Three category profiles for factors
influence the stable imagery patterns and three category profiles for the factors influencing the dynamic imagery patterns. The themes from each category profile are presented in the results.
The new and ceased to exist imagery patterns are presented separately.
Personal factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns
From the category personal factors influencing the stability of the imagery patterns five themes emerged: Imagery as a part of the routine (7), Satisfied with the imagery experiences (7), Positive self-confidence (4), Lack of knowledge about changeability of imagery (3) and Stable feelings (3).
Imagery as a part of the routine
Three players described their stable imagery experiences with the fact that they always had experienced this type of imagery. Moreover, one player reported that he experienced imagery in the same way now as before he participated in the present study and that he always used imagery in the same way. More specifically one player talked about imagery as a routine and stated: “It can be that it (the imagery patterns) has become a routine that you can lean on”
Satisfied with the imagery experiences
Some players reported that they were satisfied with their imagery patterns. More specifically, one player reported that the imagery patterns he used felt positive. Some players were
satisfied with their imagery experiences in general and one player was satisfied with the positive effects from using imagery. In line with this, one player said that he liked the way he used imagery before the games in order to get concentrated on the task and the competition.
Positive self-confidence
One player reported enhanced self-confidence explicitly to be the reason for the stability of his imagery. Another player reported in the interview “You feel comfortable in what you are doing… and what you stand for…” He further described it with a metaphor: “I have found my Stable imagery
patterns
Dynamic imagery patterns
New imagery patterns created
Imagery patterns that ceased to exist
12 22 4 1
place in the puzzle”. This made the player feel confident and he did not change his imagery experiences.
Lack of knowledge about changeability of imagery
Two players reported that they had a lack of knowledge concerning the changeability of imagery. One player reacted to the question why there were no changes in his imagery with asking the interviewer if it is possible to change the imagery. Another player said that he did not know what to do if he wanted to make changes in his imagery.
Stable feelings
Three players reported that they had the same feelings around their ice hockey as the last time they were interviewed and therefore no changes had appeared in their imagery experiences.
However, it is not clear what they meant with feelings around the ice hockey.
Performance/task factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns
From the category performance/task factors that influence the stability of imagery patterns, three themes emerged: Stable successful individual performances (4), Stable team
performances (3) and Perceived need in using imagery (2).
Stable successful individual performances
Three players reported that their performances in ice hockey were successful and therefore they had not changed their imagery patterns. One player said that he probably would use imagery more if he was performing poorly.
Stable team performances
The team’s performances were reported to influence the stability of the imagery experiences of the ice hockey players. One player reported that the team’s performances have been the same and therefore no reasons occurred to change his imagery patterns. Another player further reported that if the team was successful he as a player also was successful. The results of the team were also mentioned as an important factor influencing the imagery experiences.
Perceived need in using images
One player reported that he needed imagery to perform and therefore did not change. He described it as: “When you do not use it you feel that you are physiological lower in your performance already before the competition started”
Environmental factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns
From the category environmental factors influencing the stability of imagery patterns one theme emerged: Few changes in the sport environment (2).
Few changes in the sport environment
Several players reported that there were no reasons to change their imagery because there were no changes in the sport context. One player reported in one interview that they only have been playing five games since the last interview and therefore he had no changes in his
imagery patterns. Another player said that nothing had changed since the last time.
Personal factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns
Four themes emerged in this category: Changes in self-confidence (8), Changes in attitude to the sport (3), Lack of physical practice (2) and Enhanced motivation (2).
Changes in self-confidence
Three players mentioned self-confidence as a reason for the changes in their imagery patterns.
Two players experienced more positive effects on their imagery patterns because their self- confidence was higher. They felt that it was easier to create positive imagery. One player reported poor self-confidence as the reason for his more negative imagery experiences.
Insecurity and doubtfulness were reported by one player to influence his experience of more negative imagery. Moreover, one player explained the importance for him to feel the trust in him as a player. To know that even though he may make a mistake he still gets to play. When this trust was lacking his imagery experience got more negative.
Changes in attitude to the sport
Personal factors as laziness and satisfaction were found to be reasons for one player’s more negative imagery experiences. For example, the player reported that he could not create the positive images and turned his imagery pattern from a positive effect of +4 to a negative effect of -4 during the period between measurement two and three. However, this was an extreme change and most of the changes were not this big. Moreover, one player reported that he had become more egoistic and used imagery more because he could not get self-confidence from the team.
Lack of physical practice
Lack of physical practice was reported by two players as a factor that influenced their imagery experiences negatively. One player explained his interpretation of the relationship between imagery and his physical state: “If my body and legs are feeling good then it is ok. It is hard for me to imagine good legs if you know….. I can do it to a certain extent but it is the physics that has the biggest effect on me…”
Enhanced motivation
One player reported that he had enhanced his motivation and experienced new energy for ice hockey. Therefore his imagery use had become more positive.
Performance/task factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns From this category one theme emerged: Changes in performance (5).
Changes in performance
One player reported that his imagery experiences changed depending on how he performed on the ice. Another player reported that because he now performs better he perceives his imagery to have more positive effects. Three players reported that poor performances was the factor influencing their more negative imagery experiences. Two of the players reported that their own poor performances influenced their imagery experiences. One player reported the team’s poor performances to affect his imagery experiences.
Environmental factors influencing the dynamicity of imagery patterns
This category presented four themes: Changes in social influences (5), Back playing after injury (1), Changes of situation in the team (4) and Changed role in the team (2).
Changes in social influences
Expectations were mentioned by two players as reasons for them to change their imagery.
One player liked the expectations that were on the team and he therefore experienced imagery more frequently. One player reported that he did not have any expectations on himself and that was one of the factors that influenced him to experience imagery more frequently. At the
second measurement one player reported that he started to include emotions in two of his imagery patterns in the context outside competition/practice. He explained this change with how the season progressed and that he had become more aware of the expectations and the pressure. Thereby his emotions in relation to the ice hockey changed. One player reported that he lacked support from the coach. Therefore the player did not feel confident when he played.
This made him experience imagery more negatively and the effects of the imagery patterns decreased.
Changes of situation in the team
The team’s situation and the more exposed view of the team by the media were mentioned by one player to influence his imagery experiences. The pressure and the media made him use imagery more frequently. Another player changed his perception of the effects of imagery experiences and experienced his imagery to have more negative effects, because of the negative atmosphere in the team. He described that the team had dragged him down into a negative trend.
Back playing after injury
One player reported that because he had started to play 2-3 games per week he used imagery more frequently. Compared to when he was injured and did not play any games at all.
Changed role in the team
One player described that his role in the team had changed and he felt more responsibility. He described why the effect of his imagery had improved with the following sentences: “I think it depends on what kind of role you have in the team and what is expected from you. It is
important to know that you need to put in some effort, which is why I think the effect has improved”
New imagery patterns created
Imagery pattern nr 37 was experienced spontaneously with perceived positive effect outside competition/practice. The player reported that he felt more responsible for the group because the situation of the team was tensed. That made him experience spontaneous imagery of himself scoring goals and the team winning. One player reported that the poor performances of the team and the negative atmosphere in the team affected him to create a new spontaneous imagery pattern with perceived negative effects. One player created a new voluntary imagery pattern with positive effects during practice because he was back playing from an injury and felt that he needed to use imagery more. Another player created a new positive voluntary imagery pattern when he saw himself scoring goals. He explained this change by his enhanced self-confidence since the last interview. Moreover, one player reported that he was thinking a lot more of ice hockey in general and therefore his spontaneous imagery experiences were more frequent. Therefore he experienced a new spontaneous imagery pattern with positive effect outside competition/practice. The lack of physical practice, being lazy and getting satisfied were mentioned as factors by the player when explaining why his imagery
experiences had become more negative. More specifically, his satisfaction was explained by the player by that he and the team performed well in the beginning of the season and then he had become satisfied and thereby lazy and did not perform optimally. This together affected the player to create a new spontaneous imagery pattern with perceived negative effect.
Imagery pattern that ceased to exist
One imagery pattern ceased to exist during this study. This was imagery pattern nr 32. The imagery pattern was reported at the second measurement and disappeared at the third. This
imagery pattern was experienced by one player spontaneously and had a perceived negative effect. At the second measurement the player experienced high self-confidence and
motivation for playing ice hockey and therefore the imagery pattern reported at the
measurement in January had ceased to exist. He explained this change in the following way:
“…because when you have been in a really tough period, then coming to practice every day is not as fun, it is almost that you feel the practice is boring. Then I got sick for three days and it was like I got new energy from that. Because then when I came back it was fun again and after that everything has been going well”. When the player returned he also mentioned that he did not have any expectations on himself, these factors together influenced the player and his imagery experiences.
Individual differences in the stability and dynamicity
All five players differed in the total content overlap of their imagery patterns during the season. The total content overlap varied from 0.73 to 0.95. They all experienced different numbers of imagery patterns and all players experienced both stable and dynamic imagery patterns. Player D had one imagery pattern that ceased to exist. Players B and C both did not experience any new imagery patterns or imagery patterns that ceased to exist (see Table 2).
The players all had an idiosyncratic imagery profile of their imagery patterns (Appendix 4-8).
The changes in their imagery patterns were different. Especially in the dimensions frequency and effect were some players had a small change (e.g., from +5 to +8) and some had bigger changes (e.g., -4 to +4).
Table 2
Differences in the stability and dynamicity of imagery patterns
Individual differences were also found in the experiences of spontaneous and voluntary imagery patterns among the players. Players A and B did not experience any spontaneous imagery they only experienced voluntary imagery patterns. Player D experienced six spontaneous imagery patterns which was more than the other players. All the voluntary and spontaneous imagery patterns of the players are presented in Appendix 4-8.
Discussion
The present study monitored five elite ice hockey players’ imagery experiences during a season from October until March. The objectives of the study were to examine: a) the
dynamicity and stability of ice hockey players’ imagery patterns; b) the factors influencing the development of ice hockey players’ imagery experiences and c) individual differences
concerning the imagery experiences. Regarding the first objective, the results showed that the imagery patterns were stable, dynamic, new imagery patterns were created and one imagery pattern ceased to exist during the season. For the second objective the data from the
interviews showed that the stability and dynamicity of imagery patterns can be explained by personal, environmental and task/performance factors. If no changes were reported in these
Players Stable imagery patterns
Dynamic imagery patterns
New created imagery patterns
Ceased to exist imagery patterns
Total content overlap
A 3 2 1 0.92
B 3 3 0.95
C 2 5 0.93
D 1 11 2 1 0.73
E 3 1 1 0.8
factors the imagery pattern was stable. When these factors changed in some way, the imagery patterns changed. For the last objective, the results showed that imagery is an idiosyncratic experience. The players experienced different numbers of spontaneous and voluntary imagery patterns, which also differed in the stability and dynamicity.
The results in this study support the main findings in the Analytic framework of imagery experiences by Weibull (2006) e.g., that some dimensions of an imagery pattern can be shared between individuals. In addition to this, new findings were reported in this study. Imagery patterns have been found in Weibull (2006) to be dynamic over time. No study has
specifically examined the development of imagery patterns over time without the influence of an intervention. This study confirms that imagery patterns are dynamic over time. Even though most imagery patterns were dynamic rather than stable the dimensions content, purpose and how were stable over time in all imagery patterns except two. These imagery patterns were changed in the dimension how. Fournier and colleagues (2008) found that the content and characteristics (e.g., senses and perspective) were related to the function, and when the function changed the content and characteristics also changed. The results from the present study support this relation between the dimensions and show that imagery patterns are most stable in the dimensions such as content, purpose and how and most dynamic in the dimensions frequency and effect.
The qualitative data from the interviews were categorized into the pre-determined factors from the Action theory, describing why the imagery patterns were stable, dynamic, new imagery patterns were created or old ones ceased to exist. Nitsch (1985) suggested that the actions of humans are based on the dynamic relationship between a person and his or her environment and the given task. The results from this study show that this assumption is true for imagery experiences as well. When the players are satisfied with their personal,
environmental and task/performance factors the imagery patterns were stable. When positive changes were perceived in these factors for example enhanced self-confidence, the imagery patterns were reported to be more positive. If the players experienced a negative change in one of these factors, for example poor performance, the changes in the imagery patterns were perceived as negative. Why these factors influenced the imagery patterns can be discussed based on the assumption of Hackfort (2006). He suggests that the relationship between the person and his or her environment especially in elite performance is influenced by the given task. Players in the study reported their individual performances and the team’s performances influence their imagery experiences. Their performances influenced both the stability and the dynamicity of their imagery patterns. This shows a tendency that this relationship is important to consider concerning imagery experiences and especially in elite athletes where the
performance is important.
The results in this study showed that the players’ imagery experiences were dynamic. Some imagery patterns were dynamic and changed over time although the changes in the imagery patterns were small. The time period of one season, and that the study was conducted during the competitive part of the players’ season, should be considered when discussing the
changes. Previous research has found that imagery is favourable to include during the off and pre-season (Cumming & Hall, 2002). Maybe the players in this study did not want to change their imagery during the season in order to not interfere with the performance. Another explanation can be in line with the findings in Mina’s (1978) and Nordin and Cumming’s (2006) studies that feedback is important for athletes in order to improve their imagery. The players in the present study did not receive any feedback from the author about their imagery experiences and that might explain why they did not improve their imagery experiences more.
The elite athlete status of the participants should be considered and earlier studies for example Cumming and Hall (2002) have found that elite athletes use imagery more controlled and in a more effective way compared to low level athletes. Although this study can not compare the results to low level athletes, this study shows that the imagery experiences in elite ice hockey players are not that controlled and stable and need to be improved. Moreover, this stability can be the result of a lack of knowledge that was reported by the players. All players wanted to change their imagery but they did not know how to do that. It can also be that the imagery patterns have developed to be a stable part in the players imagery experience and that the imagery patterns are interacting with each other in the players’ idiosyncratic imagery profile.
In a way that when changing one imagery pattern the whole profile is affected, and the players were therefore afraid to change their imagery. The imagery profile was reported by the
players to reflect their performances during their season and some players reported that they always experienced imagery in the same way. This can be in line with that the players reported their imagery experiences as a routine.
Twenty-two imagery patterns were dynamic during the season. The influence of personal and performance factors on imagery experiences has been reported earlier by Cumming and colleagues (2004). The personal, environmental and performance/task factors have been found to affect the performances of individuals (Hackfort, 2006) and this study found that the imagery experiences are influenced by the same three factors. That imagery experiences are influenced by the same factors as real performance are interesting. Imagery has been found to be closely related to real performance as in that they share the same pathway in the brain (Decety, 1996) called functional equivalence. Researchers have recommended functional equivalent imagery to be used to make imagery more effective (Callow, et al., 2006). This present study did not examine the neuropsychological aspect in imagery. Although, the results from the present study shows that the relationship between real performances and imagery experiences are closely related in to the three factors from the Action theory (Nitch, 1985).
The author suggests in line with previous findings (e.g., Orlick & Partington, 1988) that imagery should be used in order to enhance athletes’ performances. More specifically, the author suggests that real performances should be used in order to enhance the imagery experiences. The players in the study reported that when they performed successfully, their effort to create positive imagery was lower. During this period, when the performance is successful, the players should put more effort to stimulate and store the positive images.
These stored images can be used as a tool when the player is performing poorly in order to enhance the performance. Research in this area has only looked one way at this relationship and it is important to consider a two way relationship between real performance and imagery experiences.
The players in the study experienced both voluntary and spontaneous imagery with perceived positive and negative effects. The players reported in Wallsbeck’s (2008) study that they wanted to control their spontaneous imagery in order to make their imagery more effective.
This was also found among dancers (Nordin & Cumming, 2005). One hypothesis by the author before the study, based on these findings was that the players would change their spontaneous imagery patterns and experience more voluntary imagery patterns. This was not found in this study. The results show that spontaneous imagery can be stable over time and that the athletes needs help in order to make their spontaneous imagery more voluntary.
Concerning individual differences, the results of this study show that imagery experiences were different between the players. Together with previous research (e.g., Nordin &
Cumming, 2005) this supports the notion that imagery is an idiosyncratic experience. Moritz
