Communication can be broadly defined as the process of using words, signs, or behaviors to express information or to express ideas, feelings, etc., to someone else (Communication, 2014). However, communication can be ineffective if the listener does not comprehend what is being communicated. Thus, communication does not necessitate understanding, though it is the intention. In my field of post-rehab, I often work with clients who have not been exposed to exercise. Relearning motions and movement patterns can prove to be foreign, and often frustrating for the client. Thus, it is paramount that efforts behind communication are made to maximize the learning experience and reduce feelings of defeat. In the following sections, I would like to explore two primary coaching methods: internal attentional focus (IAF) and external attentional focus (EAF), their differences, and why I implement EAF more than IAF.

Exercise professionals often implement different forms of cuing when teaching clients new movement patterns. However, are all methods effective? Is there an optimal method? Using constraints such as a bar against the back and a bench against the knees can help guide an exercise, such as the deadlift. However, it does not acknowledge that people also learn from verbal instruction. We must also recognize that as more joints become involved in a movement, the movement generally becomes more difficult and complex to learn. It is possible that constraints may not be enough in the acquisition of new skill sets.

McNevin, Wulf, and Carlson (2000) defined IAF as paying attention to one’s own body movements, and EAF as paying attention to one’s actions and the environment. The authors performed a study whereby one group of golfers focused their attention on the swing of their arms (internal focus) and the other group focused on the head of the club hitting the ball (external focus). The externally focused group had a higher accuracy than the internally focused group. Other tests (i.e., balance tests) were performed whereby the subjects picked which type of instruction (i.e., internal or external attentional focus) they thought would be better. Again, findings concluded that EAF produced better results on balance tests (McNevin et al., 2000). Since evidence suggests that EAF is a more efficacious mode of teaching skills, I have adapted my methods accordingly.

Coaching clients that are new to exercise can be demanding and challenging. It behooves us to implement methods that are simple, yet effective, when teaching difficult and complex movements and motions. Effective communication is paramount, and EAF can be part of that process.

References

Communication (2014). Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communication

McNevin, N. H., Wulf, G., & Carlson, C. (2000). Effects of attentional focus, self-control, and dyad training on motor learning: Implications for physical rehabilitation. Physical Therapy, 80(4), 373-385.

-Michael McIsaac