ICE HOCKEY PLAYERS’ UNDERSTANDING AND EXPERIENCES OF IMAGERY

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

ICE HOCKEY PLAYERS’ UNDERSTANDING AND EXPERIENCES OF IMAGERY

Halmstad University

School of Social and Health Sciences Author:

Sport Psychology, 61 – 90p, Autumn 2008 Mikael Wallsbeck Supervisor: Fredrik Weibull

Examinator: Urban Johnson

Wallsbeck, M. (2009). Ishockeyspelares förståelse och upplevelse av visualisering.

(C-uppsats i psykologi inriktning idrott, 61 – 90p). Sektionen för Hälsa och Samhälle: Högskolan i Halmstad.

En föreställning kan ha flera olika funktioner för en individ (Nordin & Cumming, 2005).

Därför valdes ett kvalitativt angreppssätt för att studera följande syften: (1) undersöka ishockey spelares förståelse för visualisering, (2) undersöka ishockey spelares upplevda visualisering och (3) ishockey spelares upplevda vilja till att förbättra sin visualisering. Elva elit ishockeyspelare (m=23,09) deltog i studien, de intervjuades en gång med instrumentet IPIES. Resultatet visar att: (1) tio av spelarna hade en korrekt och begränsad förståelse för visualisering, (2) tio spelare använde visualisering och (3) alla spelarna ville på något sätt förbättra sin visualisering. Spelarna rapporterade att de upplever frivillig, ofrivillig och spontan visualisering. Ofrivillig visualisering visade negativ effekt vilket stödjer (Weibull, 2005), denna studie stärker vidare användandet av spontan visualisering (Cumming & Hall, 2002). Studien visar att visualisering används av några ishockeyspelare och att visualisering kan upplevas frivilligt, spontant och ofrivilligt.

Nyckelord: Visualisering, Visualiseringsmönster, Frivillig, Ofrivillig, Spontan, Ishockey .

Wallsbeck, M. (2009). Ice hockey players understanding and experiences of imagery.

(C– essay in sport psychology, 61 – 90p). School of Social and Health Sciences.

University of Halmstad.

One image can have various functions for one individual (Nordin & Cumming, 2005).

Therefore this study took a qualitative approach to examine the following purposes: (1) To examine ice hockey players’ understanding of imagery, (2) to examine ice hockey players imagery experiences and (3) to examine ice hockey players’ strategies to improve their imagery. Eleven elite ice hockey players (m = 23,09) participated in this study, they were interviewed using the instrument IPIES (Weibull, 2008). The result showed that: (1) ten players had a correct and limited understanding for the concept imagery, (2) ten players experienced imagery and (3) all players in some way wanted improve their imagery. The players experienced voluntary, spontaneous and involuntary imagery. Involuntary had a negative effect that support previous findings by Weibull (2005), further this study support Cumming and Hall (2002) that some athletes experience spontaneous imagery.

The results were discussed in relation to previous imagery research.

Key words: Imagery, Imagery pattern, Voluntary, Involuntary, Spontaneous, Ice hockey

Introduction

The concept of imagery is used in many different contexts (Khaled, 2004) and researchers have tried to understand athletes’ imagery use (Barr & Hall, 1992). Imagery is seen as a subjective experience because it involves only the performer’s personal cognitive activity (Kosslyn, Behrmann, & Jeannerod, 1995). Therefore studies have been carried out in order to see what functions imagery can serve for the individual (Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998), and research have more recently focused on a qualitative approach with in depth interviews to better examine the function of the image (Munroe, Giabcobbi, Hall, &

Weinberg. 2000). Most research in this area has also been done on novice athletes or beginners (Morris, Spittle & Watt, 2005). How deliberate the imagery is to the individual has recently been seen as important and also study how spontaneous the imagery is (Nordin, Cumming, Vincent, & Mcgrory. 2006). Therefore this paper takes a deeper approach towards the voluntary, spontaneous and involuntary images effects and the use of imagery among elite athletes.

Definitions

Imagery

“Imagery, in the context of sport, may be considered as the voluntary or involuntary 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 imager” Modified version of Morris, Spittle, and Watt’s (2005) definition by (Weibull, 2005, p. 1).

Definition of imagery use

Watt, Spittle and Morris (2002, p. 20; as cited in Morris et al., 2005) defined imagery use as

“the manner in which people imagine themselves in ways that can lead to learning and developing skills and can facilitate performance of those skills. It is normally assessed in terms of its cognitive and motivational attributes.”

Definition of imagery ability

“An individual’s capacity of forming vivid, controllable images and retaining them for sufficient time to effect the desired imagery rehearsal.” (Morris, 1997, p. 37).

Perspective

Either the individual use an internal perspective and imagine herself from the same perspective as when she visually perceives the world in real life (Cumming & Ste-Marie, 2001), or an external perspective, where the individual sees himself on the basis of someone else (Callow, Roberts, & Fawkes, 2006). The imager can also vary between using an internal and external perspective (Weibull, 2005).

Modalities

Imagery can involve one or more of the different sensory modalities: visual, kinesthetic, tactile, auditory, olfactory and gustatory (Suinn, 1976). Some researchers (e.g., Vealey, &

Greenleaf, 2001) recommend athletes to use all of them. Research has shown that athletes

primarily employ visual imagery (Gregg et al., 2007), also kinesthetic imagery have shown to

be used frequently (Murphy, et al., 2008). Callow and Waters (2005) defined kinesthetic

imagery as “imagery involving the sensations of how it feels to perform an action, including

the force and effort involved in movement and balance, and spatial location (either of a body

part or piece of sports equipment)” (pp. 444-445). Athletes also report using auditory images but not to the same extent (Salmon, et al., 1994; White., & Hardy, 1998).

Functional equivalence

Researchers using the neuro physiological approach suggest that motor images share the same pathways in the brain as real motor movements (Decety, 1996). Moran (1996) called this functional equivalence, furthermore Moran (2004) suggested that for imagery to be as real as possible we should use in the same way as real performance. Some athletes reported in a study conducted by Gregg et al. (2007) that they used video to help form the image.

Theoretical Framework

Triple code model

Ahsen, (1984) developed the Triple code model, where imagery is seen from three highly integrated components: the image itself, the emotional or somatic response and the meaning of the image, and that all of these components play a role in determining the imagery experiences. This is in contrast to Paivio’s (1985) model that didn’t consider the somatic response or the meaning of the image. Callow and Hardy (2001) stated “it may not be what content is imaged that influences the confidence, but the function of what is imaged”. Further, researchers support that one image can serve many different functions for individuals (Callow

& Waters, 2005: Evans, et al., 2004; Fish, Hall, & Cumming, 2004; Nordin & Cumming, 2005; Short, et al., 2002).

The four Ws of imagery use

The four Ws of imagery use: is developed by Munroe, Giacobbi and Weinberg (2000) and consist four types of Ws Where, When, Why and What. Where is divided into the categories training and competition, when is comprised of five categories: during practice, outside practice, pre competition, during competition and post-competition. The question Why was answered by dividing their imagery use into different imagery types based on Paivio’s (1985) framework, which was further developed by Hall, Mack, Paivio and Hausenblas (1998):

Motivational specific (MS; imagery that focus on different specific goals, such as imagine yourself scoring the last goal in a tight game); Motivational General-Mastery (MG-M;

imagery that represent different coping strategies like imaging having high confident in a game); Motivational General-Arousal (MG-A; imagery the feeling of stress, anxiety or arousal together with practice); Cognitive Specific (CS; imagery of specific sport skills, like imagine a good tackle on the ice or a nice shot); Cognitive General (CG; imagery of the strategies of the game, for example imagine how to play in box play different to power play).

Munroe, Giacobbi and Weinberg, (2000) also considered the term flow as an imagery type and it involves all the images that helps the athletes to get in their flow state. What involves following: Sessions (how often and for how long the athlete use imagery), Effectiveness (how effective the image is), Nature of imagery (positive, negative and the accuracy of the image), Surroundings (e.g., imaging spectators) and four senses were reported: visual, auditory, olfactory and kinesthetic.

Model of Key Elements of an Imagery Training Program

This framework focuses on the primary components to include in an individual’s imagery

training program (ITP) and was developed by Morris, Spittle and Watt (2005), and they

recommended this structure because imagery is a very individual experience and a training

program should therefore also be individualized and use the specific components that matches

the person’s needs. The following components are included in Morris, Spittle and Watt’s

framework: Prerequisites (e.g., age and previous experiences), Environment (where the athlete should use imagery), Content (e.g., vividness, control, perspective and to make the image as realistic as possible for the athlete), Rehearsal routines (e.g., scheduling practice sessions and the duration of each session), Enhancement (e.g., include triggers, video and modeling) the final component is evaluating, meaning that athletes should use verbal and written reports to self evaluate their work. Finally a full review of the program should be carried out.

Analytic framework of 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, functions, modalities, perspectives, emotions, frequency and effect, related to a certain context and it is dynamic over time. An imagery pattern may be experienced either voluntary or involuntary (Weibull, 2008a, p. 64). Together the imagery patterns form the individual’s imagery profile. Imagery patterns can change over time, new can be created and they can disappear (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).

Previous research

Deliberate imagery

Ericsson, Krampe and Tesh-Römer (1993) proposed that deliberate practice is a highly structured and purposeful form of practice, and they also suggested that performance is a result of time spent in deliberate practice, and several researchers (Helsen, Starked, &

Hodges, 1998; Hodges & Starkes, 1996; Young & Salmela, 2002) support the use of deliberate practice. Further on, studies have found that enjoyment plays an important role in deliberate practice (Cumming, et al., 2005; MacIntyre, et al., 2007). Ericsson et al. (1993) also found that this type of practice can be used in more cognitively-based practice such as chess players imagine the strategy of the game, Murphy and colleges (2008) further propose that many of the principles of physical practice can be applied in imagery. Studies conducted in this area support that imagery can be seen as deliberate practice (Cumming & Hall, 2002;

Cumming, Hall, & Starkes, 2005; Nordin, Cumming, Vincent, & Mcgrory, 2006). More specific cognitive types of imagery seem to be more deliberate than other types of imagery (Cumming, et al., 2005; Nordin, et al., 2006), and in a study by Hanrahan and Vergeers (2001) dancers mentioned the need to know the reason and the meaning of each movement in relation to the whole dance in order to create images.

Furthermore Nordin, Cumming, Vincent and Mcgrory (2006) found that athletes use MG-M type of imagery in a deliberate way, they also found that high level athletes use more deliberate images, furthermore Nordin and colleges (2006) found that deliberate imagery was significantly correlated with high concentration while spontaneous imagery (see below) was significantly correlated with low concentration.

Spontaneous imagery

Murphy, Nordin, and Cumming, (2008) suggest in their model A neurocognitive model of

imagery in sport, exercise and dance that imagery can be experienced for no specific reason

at all, and therefore experienced as spontaneous. Most images that are experienced on daily

bases are not deliberate, they are generated spontaneously (Kosslyn, Seger, Pani, & Hillger,

1990). Reported spontaneous imagery have been rated as effective by some athletes (Vecchio

& Bonifacio, 1997), and easy to control and to experience vividly by some (Starker, 1974).

In a study by Vergeer (2003) athletes reported that spontaneous imagery can interfere with deliberate imagery, furthermore dancers reported that they wanted to make their spontaneous images more deliberate in order to enhance their effect (Cumming, et al., 2002). Hanrahan and Vergeer (2001) found that dancers used motivational images spontaneously. More recently Nordin and colleges (2006) showed that MS and MG-A types of imagery was not used deliberately, furthermore Nordin, et al. (2006) proposed that this type of imagery fits the theory of deliberate play (Cote, 1999; Cote, Baker, & Abernethy, 2003). “Deliberate play activities are designed to maximize inherent enjoyment, are only loosely monitored, and lack focus in the immediate correction of mistakes” (Cote et al., 2003). Golfers (Smith & Holmes, 2004) reported some spontaneous images of themselves holding a trofè, and dancers (Cumming, et al., 2002) “taking a mental holiday”. In both examples they reported spontaneous images that fit in the definition of deliberate play, but also of spontaneous imagery (Nordin, et al., 2006; Smith, et al., 2004).

Furthermore Weibull (2005, 2007) showed that both promising and professional tennis players sometimes experienced involuntary imagery (a type of spontaneous imagery). Injured athletes have also reported to experience involuntary images (Driediger, Hall, & Callow, 2006). Professional dancers reported spontaneous images that were involuntary created (Cumming, et al., 2002). Skaters in Rodgers and colleges (1991) study reported that they experienced images of themselves skating incorrectly, and this was seen as involuntary by the authors.

In a study by Overby, Hall and Haslam (1998) dance teachers reported imagery that was spontaneously triggered. Other earlier studies have also reported triggered imagery (Franklin, 1996; Giacobbi, Hausenblas, & Penfield, 2005), and can be seen as spontaneous imagery (Murphy, et al., 2008).

Directions

Woolfolk, Parrish and Murphy (1985) wrote that imagery can have a positive direction or a negative direction. There are also studies suggesting that the direction doesn’t matter (e.g., Epstien, 1980; Mayers, Schleser, Cooke & Cuvillier, 1979), while others support Woolfolk and colleges (1985) with results demonstrating that performance was facilitated by positive images and debilitated by negative images (Powell, 1973; Short, et al., 2002; Hanton, Stephen

& Mellaalieu, 2004; Cumming, et al., 2005; Weibull, 2005; MacIntyre, et al., 2007). Bandura (1997) recommended individuals to imagine positive pictures to enhance self-efficacy because it blocks the negative images. More recent research have suggested that negative images can have an positive effect (Cumming, Nordin, Horton & Reynolds, 2006) therefore in summary directions should refer to the outcome not the image it self (Short et al., 2002), and that athletes posses a more complex use of direction than research previously have found (MacIntyre, et al., 2007).

Effect

A study by Weibull (2005, 2007a) showed that both promising and professional tennis players

sometimes experienced involuntary imagery with facilitative effect (a type of spontaneous

imagery) in several different contexts. The results from the study also showed that players

sometimes experienced the involuntary imagery to have very negative effects. Rodgers, et al.

(1991) found in a study conducted on figure skaters that the skaters saw themselves skating incorrectly. Dancers reported in Cumming and colleges (2002) study that they experienced some spontaneous images that had a negative approach, more specifically Epstien, (1980) found negative correlation between performance and spontaneous external imagery. Further Hanton, Mellalieu and Hall (2004) studied coping strategies in conclusion with anxiety and found that positive images leads to higher self-confidence and negative images decrease the self-confidence. Ramsey and colleges (2008) further found that even a small amount of debilitative image can have a negative effect on performance.

Imagery is very subjective and have different meanings for different individuals, an image can has have a facilitative effect for one individual and a debilitative effect for another individual (Short, Bruggeman, Engel, Marback, Wang, & Willadsen, 2002). Several imagery skills can be used for the same purpose (Nordin & Cumming, 2005), therefore the nature of the image for the individual (White & Hardy, 1998) and the importance to match the functions to the outcome (Martin, Moritz, & Hall, 1999; Denis, 1985). Should be considered to make the image as specific as possible for the individual (Gregg, et al., 2007). In summary everybody has the skills to use imagery but there are individual differences in how the images are created (Martin, et al., 1999).

Imagery use among athletes

In competition the use of imagery is more frequent than in practice (Salmon, Hall & Haslam, 1994; Gregg, Hall, & Hanton, 2007), though athletes that use imagery in conjunction with training report a positive effect (Gregg, et al., 2007). It has been reported that imagery is used by athletes before sleep, in training and that long sequences is unusual (Rodgers, et al., 1991).

The elite tennis players in Weibull’s (2005, 2007a) study used imagery before, during and after both training and competition and also outside training and competition (e.g., before going to sleep). Only one of the 15 athletes participating in Weibull’s study used imagery after practice. In the context of competition it has been found that the use of imagery is more frequent before than during and directly afterwards (Salmon, Hall, & Haslam, 1994).

Moritz, Hall, Martin and Vadocz (1996) found that high confident athletes’ use of imagery was more controlled and effective compared to low confident athletes’ imagery use. Athletes on a high competitive level use imagery more frequently than athletes on lower competitive levels (Cumming & Hall, 2002; Hall, Rodgers, & Barr, 1990). Athletes use imagery more frequently in the competitive part of the season than in the beginning of the season (Munroe, Hall, Simms & Weinberg, 1998). Munroe et al. (1998) also found that imagery use increased as the competitive season progressed. Athletes also use imagery in off season, predominantly to maintain their confident and to keep up positive thinking (Cumming & Hall, 2002).

Moreover Arvinen, Weigand, Hemmings and Walley (2008) failed to find any significant differences between competitive level and time of season and the use of imagery.

Recent research has shown that one imagery type can serve various functions (Cumming, et al., 2002; Gammage., Hall., & Rodgers., 2000; Weibull., 2007a). Athletes report using imagery for functions such as strategy, goal setting, enhance self-confidence, improve concentration, reduce anxiety and enhance quality of training (e.g., Orlick & Partington, 1988). Professional and promising elite tennis players reported technique, concentration, strategy and self-confidence as common purposes for their imagery use (Weibull, 2005;

2007). Furthermore, dancers reported that they used metaphorical images to help them to

perform at top level (Hanrahan & Vergeer, 2001 Nordin & Cumming, 2005). Morris and

colleges (2005) reported that athletes use imagery “to replay the whole performance” (p. 222).

This type of review imagery use has been supported (Janssen, et al., 1994), and found among athletes (McIntyre, et al., 2007; White, et al., 1998) and MacIntyre and colleges (2007) found that most athletes in their study used imagery for review.

Qualitative research has found imagery to be used as a strategy to remove involuntary thoughts (Krane & Williams, 2006) and negative images and replace them with positive images (Hanton, et al., 2004). Imagery has also been found to be used as a strategy to re- experience positive performances to enhance their performances (MaIntyre, et al., 2007 &

Janssen, et al., 1994). Furthermore Murphy and colleges (2008) suggest in line with previous research (Murphy, 1994; Rushall, 1988) that imagery helps athletes to change their thoughts and beliefs

Some differences between team and individual sports were found by Hall et al. (1998), they found that ice hockey players more frequently used the MS and MG-M functions of imagery than athletes in track and field. Hall and colleges (1994) stated that some skills can be easier to imagine than others. As support for this, studies have found that different movements have different imagery values and that easy images are better remembered (Hall, 1980; Hall &

Buckolz, 1982). A second view is that the task might influence the imagery effectiveness (Callow & Hardy, 2005), and that it would be easier to practice imagery in closed skill sports compared to open skill sports because the athlete do not get disturbed by external stimuli like an opponent (Highlen & Bennett, 1979).

As mentioned above more recent research has shown that one imagery type can serve various functions (Cumming, et al, 2002; Gammage, et al, 2000; Weibull, 2005, 2007a), therefore recent research have focused on interviews (Cumming, et al., 2002; Weibull, 2005, 2007a) and qualitative instruments have been developed (e.g., IPIES). The qualitative aspect gets support by researchers, Gregg, Hall and Hanton, 2007 suggests that one way to gain more information about why athletes use imagery differently in different situations is simply by asking them. Further the author of this study wants to develop the qualitative research and the understanding for imagery and have following objectives for this paper.

Objectives

1)

To examine ice hockey players’ understanding of imagery

To examine ice hockey players imagery experiences

3)

To examine ice hockey players’ strategies to improve their imagery.

Method Participants

Eleven male professional ice hockey players participated in the study. They were between 20 and 32 year old (M = 23.09, sd. = 3.41). They had been active in the sport with a mean of 16.63 years (sd=3.38). All players competed at a national level. Four participants had international experiences from the junior teams.

Instrument

The instrument Individual Profile of Imagery Experience in Sport (IPIES; Weibull, 2008b),

(Appendix 6) 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 (Morris, et al., 2005). IPIES is used to examine athletes’ imagery experiences. The instrument has three parts, the first part is background questions (e.g., age and competitive level); in the second part the players’ understanding of imagery is examined. It 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 were examined, and it involves 3A voluntary imagery and 3B involuntary imagery. These are divided into six parts but 3B doesn’t have the column “why” because involuntary images do not have a purpose.

The parts are Context (where and when they use imagery); What (the content in the imagery), Why (e.g., improve concentration), How (e.g., modalities and perspectives included);

Frequency (how often they use the specific imagery in the specific context) and Effect (the perceived effect of the specific imagery in the specific context). The frequency have two different scales, one more specific and one more general, the athlete choose the most appropriate one. The fourth part starts with that the players evaluate the modalities they use.

Then it is four scales that examine the athlete’s imagery control, visual clarity and how strong emotions and kinesthetic feelings they experience. Then it is another question about the players’ development in imagery and the final question if they would like to improve their imagery ability and in that case how.

Procedure

The author did a presentation for 23 players, informed about the purpose of the study and that an interview would be done and last for about 60 min. Eleven players were interested in participating and gave their name, telephone number and e-mail address to the author. The players were then contacted over phone and time and place for the interview was decided.

Eight interviews were carried out at the rink after practice and the rest were carried out at school or at the player’s home. All interviews were done with the IPIES and tape recorded. At the interview the players were informed again about the purpose of the study, that it is voluntary and that all data would be treated confidentially, each player also gave a written informed consent. The interviews lasted for about 25-75 minutes, with an average of 41 minutes. Five players were contacted after the interview to fill up gaps in the information.

Data analyses

Qualitative analyses

For the first and third objectives a qualitative (i.e., deductive and inductive) analysis was used with quantification of raw data units in each low-, high-order themes and categories.

Quantitative analyses

The quantitative part in 1:2 was analyzed by summarize all definitions reported by the players and further add the frequency for each definition and compare it to the frequency of all definitions together.

Combined qualitative and quantitative analyses

For the second objective all the information from Part 3 were structured into different imagery

patterns. An imagery pattern is a concrete idiosyncratic imagery experience, which is

multidimensional in terms of content, functions, modalities, perspectives, emotions, frequency

and effect, related to a certain context and it is dynamic over time. An imagery pattern may be

experienced either voluntary or involuntary (Weibull, 2008a, p. 64). There were however a

slight change in the approach on how patterns could be experienced. In this study the patterns

were first organized into eleven individual profiles, the patterns were then dived into different

kinds of imagery: voluntary, spontaneous and involuntary, and further into the specific context, as pattern profiles.

Result

The players’ understanding of imagery

Ten out of the eleven players that participated in this study had enough knowledge about imagery in order to answer the open question in part 2:1 (in IPIES) about their understanding of imagery. Their answers formed seven high order themes from ten raw data units (see Appendix 1): Goals (3), Pictures (2), Create new and old pictures (5), Use to get positive outcomes (2), Thoughts and feelings (3),Negative and positive (2) and When you focus on something (1). These themes formed a definition of imagery: “Create new and old pictures and goals to get focused and positive outcomes which can be experienced either negative or positively”

All players answered the structured question in part 2.1 (in IPIES) and they selected three definitions they felt best described their understanding of imagery. All definitions were chosen minimum one time (see Appendix 2) and the definitions most frequently reported by the players were: through imagery one can re-create memories of sensory feelings and visual images (24%) followed by imagery can be voluntary and involuntary (21%).

The players’ imagery experiences

Ten players used imagery and together they used in total 70 imagery patterns, were 59 imagery patterns differed from each other. These patterns where divided into three different kinds of imagery: voluntary, spontaneous and involuntary imagery, and presented in tables (see Appendix 3-5). These patterns are organized after the given context when the pattern was used (e.g., before practice, during competition). If the same pattern was used by several players this is shown by a number in brackets after the name of the pattern. If no number is given the pattern is used by one player in the specific context. These patterns are presented horizontally in four columns. In the column why all the different purposes that were used for each pattern in each specific pattern are presented. If several player uses the same pattern in the same context with the same purpose this is presented with a number in a bracket. The column how presents: the imagery perspectives that are used in the specific patterns (internal, external or variation between the two perspectives), the speed of imagery, the modalities included and possibly emotions. After each perspective, modality and emotion there is a numbers representing how many times they were used for the specific pattern. If several players use the same pattern a mean of frequency for each scale is presented. In the column effectiveness the different numbers representing the perceived effectiveness of the patterns are presented, if several players use the same pattern the mean of their perceived effect is presented.

The players’ experience of voluntary imagery

Ten players used a total of 39 imagery patterns voluntary, 28 of these imagery patterns

differed from each other and were used by one or several players and are summarized in the

specific context. The players reported to use imagery in all contexts except in the context

directly after practice. The four columns: why, how, how often and effect following

horizontally after the label of the pattern in tables (see Appendix 3).

Before practice. Three imagery patterns were used voluntarily before practice (Appendix 3):

Working hard, Positive images from previous practice/competition and Previous good performance in upcoming task. The pattern Previous good performance in upcoming task was imagined by the athlete when he was informed about the task in the upcoming practice, and used this pattern for concentration. Five other purposes were reported in this context:

intensity, aggressive, positive feeling, performance ability and self-esteem. One athlete used a variation between an internal and external perspective, one player used an internal and one only an external perspective. All the players used the visual sense when imagine the pattern, one player also included hearing and another emotions. All patterns were perceived to have a positive effect (M = +4).

During practice. In this context eight imagery patterns were used (Appendix 3): Transform practice situations into competitive situations, Individual tricks and shots, The sound of the audience, See the replay of a good save, Good situations with the puck involved, Where to shoot, Actions to trick a defender and Positive and negative situations. Five athletes reported positive feeling as why they used the pattern. Two players also used the imagery pattern to increase their motivation and improve concentration. The pattern Negative and positive situations were used for analyzing, during breaks in the practice or in the line before exercise, during every practice. The player who used the pattern Where to shoot didn´t include outcome in the image. The visual sense was used in all patterns except for the pattern The sound of the audience, were only hearing and emotions were included. Emotions were included in two of the patterns and kinesthetic feelings in one. Two athletes switched between both perspectives and also between imagery in real time and in slow motion. The remaining players used only the internal perspective and imagined in real time. The percieved effects were positive for all players with a mean of + 6.

Before competition. Five different imagery patterns were used before competition (see Appendix 3): Positive situations, Positive performance, Previous positive competitive performance, Positive outcome in different situations and The end of the game. Five participants used the pattern Positive situations and they all used this before every game.

Positive performance was reported by two athletes and they both switched between an internal and external perspective. One player reported to imagine the pattern The end of the game from an internal perspective, when the player were happy together with his teammates and audience right before leaving the locker room. All senses were included except for olfactory and taste. The visual sense was used the most (the difference was however not significant). One ice hockey player used a variation between slow motion and real time the rest of the players imagined in real time. Of the total ten patterns eight were used regularly before every game (i.e., 10/10). All ten players experienced positive effects from using these imagery patterns (M = +8.8)

During competition. In this context six different patterns were used (Appendix 3): Recreate

negative situations into positive, Do something different, Positive situations, Previous positive

situations from good competition, Recreate negative situations into positive and positive

situations and finally Positive and negative situations. The patterns Recreate negative

situations into positive and Recreate negative situations into positive and positive situations

were both used by two players and they used them for the purpose analyzing and used it

during every game including different situations from the game. If they experienced a

negative situation they recreated the image and if it was positive situation they enhanced that

experience. The player using the pattern Do something different imagined doing something

unusual, something different from what he normally did. He used the pattern in order to get back in the game with a positive feeling. The patterns in this context were mostly used for to increase positive feelings. Four players used imagery during every game. Also here the players experienced a positive effect of the imagery patterns with a mean of +7.3.

Directly after competition. Three patterns were used voluntarily directly after a game (Appendix 3): Recreate negative situations into positive situations and positive situations, Positive images from the performance of the group and Positive images from individual performance. Analyzing, self esteem and positive feeling were reported as purposes for these patterns. Two players used the pattern Recreate negative situations into positive and positive situations directly after every competition to analyze the game and recreate the negative into something good and to strengthen the positive situations, one player included kinesthetic feelings. Positive effect was also found here for all of the participants (M = +9,3).

Outside practice and competition. Outside the ice hockey context three different patterns were identified (see Appendix 3): Positive and negative situations from previous competition, Positive performance and Positive and negative situations. Three players used the pattern Positive performances and two players used the pattern Positive and negative situations from previous competition. The most frequently used purpose was analyzing followed by positive feeling and confidence. The effect was positive (M = + 9,2).

The players‘ experiences of spontaneous imagery

Five players used 16 imagery patterns of spontaneous imagery and they are presented in the same way as voluntary imagery (see Appendix 4). Purposes do not exist because the images appeared spontaneously.

Before practice. Two imagery patterns were experienced before practice (Appendix 4): Other players performing good tricks and Extra good/bad specific and detailed situations, the player that experienced Other players performing good tricks experienced it before every practice as a type of modeling, he saw the tricks on TV and then recreated them. Both patterns were perceived to have positive with a mean of +7,5.

During practice. Three imagery patterns were experienced during practice (Appendix 4): Pick a fight, Great save and Extra good/bad specific and detailed situations. The kinesthetic sense was included in Pick a fight and Good/bad specific and detailed situations. Tactile, visual imagery and emotions were included in all three patterns. The players also experienced a switch between the perspectives in the patterns. In one pattern a player included auditory imagery. The mean effect experienced was +7,6.

Directly after practice. In conjunction to this context one pattern was identified (Appendix 4):

Good/bad specific and detailed situations. The player switched between an internal and external perspective, and experienced the modalities visual, kinesthetic and tactile together with emotions. He experienced it eight out of ten practices and perceived an effect of +8.

Before competition. Two imagery patterns were identified in this context (se Appendix 4), one player experienced the imagery pattern Offensive and defensive strategies before every game and experienced the images of defensive and offensive strategies depending on the opponent.

Furthermore the player used a variation between real time and slow motion. The second

pattern reported was Extra good/bad situations and included both tactile and kinesthetic

feelings. The visual sense was experienced in both patterns and also a variation between the perspectives were experienced in both patterns, and the perceived mean effect was + 7,5.

During competition. Four imagery patterns were experienced during competition (Appendix 4): Owning a porche and standing beside it, Driving a porche, Interviewed by journalist and having pictures taken and Extra good/bad situations. The patterns Owning and Driving a porche were both experienced from an external perspective and involved the same modalities (i.e., visual, emotion), when Driving a porche the player experienced auditory imagery. One player experienced an internal perspective and one player experienced a variation between the perspectives. All patterns were experienced to have positive effects (M = +6,8).

Directly after competition. In this context one pattern was identified (Appendix 4): Good/bad situations. The player switched between an internal and external perspective, and included the modalities visual, kinesthetic and tactile together with emotions. He experienced it after eight out of ten games with a perceived effect of +8.

Outside practice/competition. The imagery patterns Feedback, Earlier games and Extra good/bad situations were reported in this context (Appendix 4). In the imagery pattern Feedback, the player images other players and the coaches giving him positive feedback. This pattern experienced outside ice hockey 5/10 games All patterns had positive effect (M = +8).

The players´ experiences of involuntary imagery

Six players experienced involuntary imagery and the players reported a total of 15 different patterns. They are summarized in tables (see Appendix 5), involuntary imagery identified in all contexts except for directly after practice.

Before practice. The pattern Bad situations from practice and competition were experienced by one player (Appendix 5) who experienced visual imagery from an internal perspective, included only the visual sense and experienced the imagery in real time. The player reported this pattern to occur before 4 out of 10 practices and perceived it to have a high negative effect (-10).

During practice. In this context three patterns were reported (Appendix 5): Negative performance, Previous negative performance and Negative voices from the coach. The pattern Previous negative performance is similar to Negative performance except for new pictures can be created. All patterns were imagined in real time, from an internal perspective and the visual sense, one athlete also included auditory imagery. The perceived effect was negative with a mean effect of -3,6.

Before competition. Two different patterns were experienced involuntarily by two players before competition (Appendix 5): Bad situations with the puck and Previous bad performance/s. The pattern Bad situations with the puck appeared before every game when the player was in bad form and every tenth game when playing good. Both patterns included the visual and auditory senses. The visual sense was experienced through a variation between the perspectives in one pattern and in the other pattern only through an internal perspective.

The mean effect experienced was -3,5.

During competition. Five patterns were reported (see Appendix 5): Bad situations, Previous

bad performance against the same team, Getting injured, Letting a goal in and earlier

mistakes. The patterns Getting injured and Letting a goal in was both experienced during every game. Earlier mistakes were experienced to have a very high negative effect: -10, all patterns together reported a mean effect of –6,8.

Directly after competition. The pattern Earlier missed situations was experienced from an external perspective and experienced seldom after games and had a perceived effect of -6, the second pattern reported in this context was Bad performance from the game. The player imagined from an internal perspective and experienced it after 9 out of 10 games, the pattern had no effect for the player (-+0). Both patterns included the modalities auditory and visual (see Appendix 5)

Outside practice/competition. Two patterns were reported in this specific context (Appendix 5): Bad performance and Previous good situations. In the pattern Previous good situations the player imagined these situations involuntary before a very important game, and reported an effect of -2. The player experienced the pattern Bad performance from an external perspective and seldom. He perceived the pattern to have a negative effect -1. Both patterns included visual and auditory imagery as the only senses.

Comparison of imagery use by the players

The three most common patterns for voluntary imagery were: Positive situations, Positive performance and Recreate negative situations into positive and positive situations. Positive feeling was mentioned as purpose 21 times for their voluntary imagery use analyzing six times and concentration five times. All senses were experienced except for olfactory and gustatory, one player imaging in slow motion. Twelve patterns had a variation between internal and external perspective. The players used voluntary imagery more in conjunction to competition than training and most frequently before competition. Eighteen out of the 39 patterns were reported regularly (i.e., 10/10), and the mean effect for all voluntary imagery was +7,4.

The imagery patterns reported most frequently reported as spontaneous imagery were: Extra good/bad situations and Extra good/bad specific and detailed situation, the other imagery patterns used once in the specific context. No purposes reported. All senses were experienced except for olfactory and gustatory. The internal perspective was reported in two imagery patterns, external perspective were also reported in two patterns and twelve imagery patterns included a variation between the perspectives. One player imaged in both real time and slow motion, the rest of the patterns were experienced in real time. Spontaneous imagery was reported the most in the contexts competition and especially during competition, and two out of 16 patterns were experienced regularly in their specific context (i.e., 10/10 on the frequently scale), the perceived effect for all spontaneous imagery reported was M= +7,6.

The two most frequently reported patterns in involuntary imagery were: Bad performance and

Bad situations. The internal perspective was reported in nine imagery patterns, external

reported five times and one player used a variation between the two perspectives. All patterns

included the visual sense, one the tactile sense, no reported kinaesthetic, nor olfactory or

gustatory modalities. One player experienced a variation between imagery in real time and

slow motion, the rest experienced imagery in real time. Involuntary imagery was experienced

in all contexts except directly after practice, and two out of 15 imagery patterns were

experienced regularly (i.e., 10/10). The mean effect for all patterns reported as involuntary

imagery was -5,4.

The players’ perceived needs related to imagery training

All ice hockey players wanted to improve their imagery in some way. Eight high order themes emerged from their answers and 18 raw data units (see Appendix 1): enhance control(3), more focused, imagine more often and constant (3), more effective(3), External perspective, more positive and less negative (4), convert negative into positive (2) and remove involuntary thoughts.

One player wanted to include video modeling more in order to enhance his use of external perspective, another player wanted to use imagery more often and in a more structured way.

Several players reported a lack of knowledge about how to improve imagery. In general they wanted to improve their control in order to minimize the experience of negative images and stay positive.

Discussion

The objectives for this study were to: (1) examine ice hockey players’ understanding of imagery; (2) examine the imagery experiences of elite ice hockey players and (3) examine ice hockey players’ strategies to improve their imagery. These objectives are discussed below in the same order as the objectives were presented.

The players’ understanding for imagery

The players’ answers from the open question in part 2.1 (of IPIES) formed the following definition of imagery: “Create new and old pictures and goals to get focused and positive outcomes which can be experienced neither negative nor positive”. This definition covers a lot that are included in imagery. Furthermore, the definition includes that new and old pictures can be created which also was found among tennis players’ understanding of imagery and their combined definition of imagery:

Imagery can be used for different purposes, it includes images related to the future and re-created memories of the past, it includes images created without external stimuli, both affective and sensory feelings and it is trainable” (Weibull, 2005 p.18). The players’ understanding for imagery is correct but limited and this study shows a tendency that imagery should be seen as a widespread concept among ice hockey players. However this should be examined further.

The most common definition in part 2.2 was: through imagery one can re-create memories of sensory feelings and visual images that is in line with previous research done with IPIES by Weibull (2005) who found the same definition to be closest to the tennis players’

understanding. Even though this definition was chosen most often by the players all the other definitions were also selected. It´s interesting that participant’s in both studies reported same definition and further research would be interesting. No differences were significant, neither in this nor in Weibull’s (2005) study. Weibull (2005) suggested that it’s important to understand that players have different understandings of the concept imagery. The author of this study agree with Weibull (2005), that in order to make the work with athletes from a sport psychology perspective more effective, one should be aware of the athletes’ understanding of the concept imagery (Morris & Watt, 2005).

Players’ imagery experiences

Ten of eleven players in this study experienced imagery in conjunction to ice hockey. Hall,

Mack, Paivio, and Hausenblas (1998) also found that ice hockey player used imagery. No

previous research has been found with a quantitative approach on ice hockey players’ imagery use. Three different kinds of imagery were recognized in this study: voluntary, spontaneous and involuntary imagery. These three kinds are going to be discussed further in this paper.

Context

Imagery is used more in conjunction to competition than practice (Salmon, Hall & Haslam, 1994: Gregg, Hall & Hanton, 2007). The result from this study is in line with previous research. Moreover, the ice hockey players reported to use imagery more (not significant) before and during competition than directly after. This was also the case among soccer players (Salmon, et al., 1994). Players in this study experienced imagery in conjunction to practice and reported a positive effect. Hepthathletes in Gregg, Hall & Hanton’s (2007) study also experienced positive effects of imagery in training. Although imagery wasn’t used in the same amount in practice as in competition in this study, a positive effect was reported in both contexts. The author of this study therefore suggests in line with Cumming, Hall and Starkes, (2005) that more imagery should be included in practice in order to enhance performance.

Ice hockey players in this study reported that they used imagery outside practice and competition, which also have been found in previous research e.g., rehabilitation from injury (e.g., Driediger, Hall, & Callow, 2006), and before going to sleep (e.g., Rodgers, 1991). This context outside practice/competition might be beneficial for athletes to use imagery in order to develop their imagery ability, were they might not get disturbed by external stimuli (Highlen

& Bennett, 1979) therefore maybe athletes can concentrate more on the imagery. Although according to the author further research in this context is preferable.

What

Several imagery patterns were reported by the players in this study, the most common were Positive situations and Positive performance. Weibull (2005) found that elite tennis players e.g., used the patterns Good serve and Good shot. The results from this study supports the results from Weibull (2005) that imagery patterns and the content of the imagery is a very idiosyncratic experience.

Why

Weibull (2005) found in his study on tennis players that the four most common purposes were: technique, concentration, strategy and self-confidence. Ice hockey players reported to mostly imagine for the following purposes: positive feeling, analyzing and concentration.

Positive feeling were used as a purpose for 21 imagery patterns (e.g., positive situations, positive performance) this purpose is not as specific e.g., technique and self confidence .Ice hockey is a team sport and might be seen as more open skilled sport than tennis, therefore the players maybe don’t want to image for a specific purpose (e.g., technique). Dancers reported (Nordin & Cumming, 2002) to use metaphorical images instead of deliberate images before competition in order not to interfere with their dance. Deliberate practice which is highly structured and purposeful form of practice and performance is result formed by time spent in deliberate practice (Ericsson, Krampe & Tesh-Römer 1993). It can be summarized that less structured images without any specific purpose as in spontaneous imagery (Murphy, Nordin,

& Cumming, 2008) might be useful in conjunction to competition, were small details aren’t

that important, and in conjunction to practice a more structured and purposeful use of imagery

should be used as in deliberate practice (Ericsson, et al., 1993).

Six imagery patterns in this study were used for the purpose analyzing. MacIntyre and Moran (2007) found that athletes in canoe-slalom used imagery to review situations, which is seen by the author of this study as a type of analyze, and imagery might be an effective tool to analyze performance.

Participants in this study reported the purpose analyzing for using the pattern positive and negative situations. Two players recreated negative images into positive ones and Krane and Williams (2006) suggested imagery to be used to remove involuntary thoughts. The players using this imagery pattern reported analyzing positive situations, by re-experience them and enhance future performance, this type of imagery has been suggested by Janssen and colleges (1994) and further supported by MacIntyre and Moran (2007). This research together with the present study shows that athletes use imagery for different purposes and different types, one function can´t be connected to a specific outcome, and therefore contradicts Martin, Moritz and Hall’s (1999) Applied model of imagery use were they connect the imagery type to a specific outcome. In summary, this study support Ahsen’s (1984) model, suggesting that it’s important to include the meaning of the image for the individual.

How

Ice hockey players in this study used a variation between an internal and external perspective rather than solely an internal or external perspective. No previous research regarding ice hockey players’ experience of perspective was found for this study. Weibull (2005) found that several tennis players´ used a variation between the two perspectives. The result of this study can be explained according to the author, that ice hockey involves different situations where you need to see tactic strategies involving several players from an external perspective (Callow, Roberts, & Fawkes, 2006), furthermore it’s important to experience situations from an internal perspective (Cumming & Ste-Marie, 2001). This finding together with this present study indicates that perspectives should be seen as an individual experience and therefore be adjusted to the individuals’ needs and the specific situations in their sport.

No previous research was found by the author of ice hockey players’ experience of senses and speed. The players in this study experienced the senses: visual, auditory, kinesthetic and tactile. No player experienced olfactory or gustatory sensation. Further the players experienced imagery in: slow-motion, real time and a variation between slow-motion and real time.

Frequency

Ten out of the eleven players participating in this study experienced imagery in some way, 22 of the total 70 patterns experienced by the players reported to be used very regularly (i.e., 10/10) which according to the author indicates in line with previous research, that athletes on higher levels use imagery frequently (e.g., Cumming & Hall, 2002).

Effect

The players perceived their spontaneous imagery to have a mean of effect +7,6 and their

voluntary imagery to have a mean of effect of + 7,4. Even though the differences are more or

less the same this is an interesting result. Research have demonstrated spontaneous imagery to

be easy to control (Starker, 1974), and also perceived to be effective (Vecchio & Bonifacio,

1997). One explanation might be that spontaneous images are not that complex and are not

used for a specific purpose and therefore are more playful. This might be seen as “deliberate

play” (Cote, 1999), However, the author of this study suggests that it should be seen as

spontaneous imagery, in order to simplify the concept. The players’ involuntary imagery patterns were perceived to have a negative mean effect of -5,4. This support previous research (Weibull, 2005) that athletes sometimes experience involuntary images with a negative effect.

This will be discussed further in this paper.

Spontaneous imagery

Five players reported that they experienced spontaneous imagery. They experienced it in all the major contexts, and the results support findings that athletes experience spontaneous imagery without any specific purpose (Murphy, Nordin, & Cumming., 2008). Although spontaneous images do not have any purpose, they are seen as facilitative by the ice hockey players in this study. Previously, dancers reported (Cumming, et al., 2002) that they wanted to make their spontaneous images more deliberate and research suggests that it’s important to include the meaning of the image for the individual (i.e., Denis, 1985) in order to enhance the effect. In summary, according to the author some spontaneous images might be facilitated by making them more deliberate as reported by Cumming and Hall (2002), and some spontaneous images might be debilitative by making them deliberate. This might according to the author explain why dancers in both Hanrahan and Vergeer’s (2001) study and in the more recent study by Nordin and Cumming, (2005) used metaphorical images right before competition, in order to not interfere with the dance.

Spontaneous images are easier to create and to control (Starker, 1974), and can include positive images like “holding a trofè” (Smith, et al., 2004) or taking a “mental holiday”

(Cumming & Hall, 2002). This is in line with this present study were one player spontaneously experienced the imagery pattern Driving a porche, and also further support Nordin and colleges (2006) that showed spontaneous imagery to be significant correlated with low concentration and deliberate images correlated with high concentration (Cumming, et al., 2005). According to the author spontaneous images might be experienced as more playful than deliberate images, therefore athletes sometimes might prefer spontaneous imagery.

No triggered imagery was found in this study, and although earlier studies have found some triggered imagery (Franklin, 1996; Giacobbi, Hausenblas, & Penfield, 2005), the author of this study agree with Murphy and colleges (2008) that triggered imagery should be seen as spontaneous imagery.

No spontaneous imagery was reported by the players to interfere with more deliberate images as found in Verger (2003). According to the author these images found in Verger (2003) might be seen as involuntary images instead of spontaneous.

Involuntary imagery

Six elite ice hockey players in this study reported that they experienced 15 involuntary imagery patterns (e.g., Bad situations, Bad performance). They experienced these involuntary imagery patterns to have negative effects. Other athletes have also reported some involuntary images with negative effect (Weibull, 2005, 2007; Driediger, Hall, & Callow, 2006;

Cumming, et al., 2002; Rodgers, Hall, & Buckolz., 1991). This research shows together with

this present study that all imagery isn`t voluntary or spontaneous, some images are

experienced involuntary by the individuals and can be seen a form of spontaneous imagery

(Weibull, 2005). Spontaneous images are created without purpose and are enjoyable for

athletes (e.g., Cumming, et al., 2002). An involuntary image has no purpose, but has a

debilitative effect on performance and should be seen as an important part in the player’s

imagery experience. As discussed by Murphy, Nordin and Cumming (2008) a lot of athletes experience imagery as debilitative and this is important to acknowledge.

One ice hockey player in this study experienced involuntary positive imagery outside the context of ice hockey with a negative effect.Woolfolk, Parrish and Murphy (1985) wrote that imagery can have a positive or negative direction, several studies have supported this view (e.g., Powell, 1973; Hanton, Stephen & Mellaalieu, 2004). Results in this study showed that a positive image may have a negative effect. Cumming, Nordin, Horton and Reynolds (2006) suggest that negative images may have a positive effect. To summarize these studies, negative images may have a facilitative effect and positive images a debilitative effect. The author agrees with Short, et al. (2002) that direction should refer to the outcome not the image itself.

Perceived needs related to imagery training

All eleven players wanted to improve their imagery in some way and two high order themes emerged from the open question: enhance control and recreate negative images into positive images. Tennis players in Weibull`s (2005) study all reported that they wanted to improve their imagery. The ice hockey players wanted to improve their control of imagery, and by that control their negative images.

It’s positive that athletes want to improve their imagery (Weibull, 2005). The question is how to help them. One player reported that he would like to include more video which have been shown to help athletes to use imagery (Gregg, Hall, & Hanton., 2007), the use of video might also be an effective way to make imagery more functional equivalent to real movements which have shown beneficial for the effect (Moran, 2004). According to the author it’s important to make the athlete understand that imagery is something idiosyncratic (Kosslyn, Behrmann, & Jeannerod, 1995) and that it takes practice become good at it (Cumming & Hall, 2002).

Imagery patterns

Several players experienced the same imagery patterns. Two imagery patterns that were experienced by more than one player were Positive situations and Positive and negative situations from previous competition. Five ice hockey players in this study experienced the imagery pattern Positive situations in the context before competition, they all included the visual sense and they all used it before 10 out of 10 games. Two players experienced the imagery pattern Positive and negative situations from previous competition one player used it for the purpose analyzing and the other player used it to get a positive feeling. One of the players included the auditory sense and the other didn’t. They also differed in the frequency were one player used it outside practice/competition 8/10 times and the other player used it 10/10 times. They perceived the imagery pattern to have an effect of +5 and +8. Although imagery patterns are idiosyncratic (Weibull, 2008) this result shows, in accordance with the Analytic framework of imagery experiences, that imagery patterns also can be experienced similarly by different players (e.g., context, content and purposes).

Methodological discussion

IPIES includes voluntary and involuntary imagery. Spontaneous imagery aren’t included as a

part in the instrument. Although some spontaneous imagery was reported by the ice hockey

players and included in the result, this was because these images weren’t used for any

purposes and therefore hard to include as voluntary, they were also experienced as facilitative

and therefore, due to the definition of the author and supervisor that involuntary imagery has