Influencia de las variables de preparación.

The least used strategy was mental imagery (mean 3.07/5 ± 0.4). This mirrors existing literature which has found that imagery was considered unimportant and difficult to prescribe by athletic trainers (Wiese et al., 1991; Hamson-Utley et al., 2008) and underutilised within physiotherapy (Arvinen- Barrow et al., 2007; Arvinen-Barrow et al., 2010). The limited use of imagery is problematic, notably because of the benefits elicited through imagery training towards increased strength (Wright & Smith, 2009; Lebon et al., 2010), electromyography activity (Wilson et al., 2010), technique development (Silbernagel et al., 2007; Olsson et al., 2008), stress regulation (Williams et al., 2010), and programme adherence (Milne et al., 2005) all of which are important factors within the strength and conditioning domain.

124

The lack of prescribed imagery interventions could be for numerous reasons. Primarily it is possible that there is uncertainty of the applications towards strength and conditioning, either the benefits of imagery interventions or the methods of instructing imagery. This would indicate that the dissemination methods utilised to broadcast the benefits, or the applications, of mental imagery training are insufficient.

The lacking promotion of imagery is supported by the widely documented reason for neglecting psychological skills being a lack of understanding (Ninedek & Kolt, 2000; Hemmings & Povey, 2002; Devonport, 2006; Hamson-Utley et al., 2008; Wilding, 2009; Arvinen-Barrow et al., 2010) with sports coaches and athletes previously reporting that amongst other skills, imagery and visualisation is an area in which they would like more information (Gould et al., 1991). This is possibly due to the complex multidimensional nature of imagery, with various imagery modes being suited to differing objectives as per the applied model of imagery use (Martin et al., 1999). For example cognitive specific imagery is more apt for technique development such as lifting technique, whilst motivational specific imagery may promote exercise adherence to a training programme.

When examining coaches‘ use of strategies to facilitate their own coaching performance it has been observed that, interestingly, imagery is one of the most frequently used strategies, conversely goal setting is used least (Thelwell et al., 2008). This reversal of strategy prioritisation to that observed in the present study is intriguing. Coaches appear to be able to utilise imagery themselves yet fail to

125

value the use of goal setting. It was apparent that, when using imagery strategies, coaches from varying disciplines predominantly employed strategies to regulate their own anxiety and emotions and to enable the foreseeing of potential problems. This, despite the small sample (n=13) used in the qualitative study (Thelwell et al., 2008), demonstrated that it appears that coaches have knowledge of imagery. It should be noted that the sample did not contain any coaches identified specifically as strength and conditioning coaches and as such raises difficulties in generalising to specific coaching disciplines. Nonetheless the current investigation provides weight to the current academic viewpoint that imagery is difficult to prescribe despite being used by the coaches.

As confidence in prescribing goal setting strategies, developed through familiarity, was hypothesised as a prime reason for the increased use of goal setting strategies, it is logical to examine the impact efficacy has upon administering lesser used strategies such as mental imagery. The lack of confidence in sport psychology has previously been demonstrated as the largest determining factor shaping a coaches intention to utilise such strategies (Zakrajsek & Zizzi, 2007; Zakrajsek et al., 2011).

Concerning the reciprocal relationship between confidence and intentions to use psychology, it is imperative that interventions are positioned in order for coaches to observe the benefits associated with using psychological strategies. That is, instigating a quantifiable outcome measure associated with the utilisation of psychological strategies would appear to be beneficial to promoting the use of psychology. The difficulty in demonstrating the quantifiable benefits of

126

psychological skills training has previously been reported as a reason shaping the intentions of coaches to use such strategies (Pain & Harwood, 2004).

It is also likely that despite observing benefits of imagery when self- prescribed (Thelwell et al., 2008) strength and conditioning coaches may consider the prescription of imagery strategies to their athletes out of the realm of their role. This assumption would reflect those observed in athletic training in which the athletic trainer had an awareness of the strategy but did not feel qualified in prescribing such cognitive strategies and deemed it to be the responsibility of the sport psychologist (Wiese et al., 1991).

Furthermore, it has been previously observed that particular cognitive skill sets are unimportant (Francis et al., 2000) and it is likely that the disparity between the frequency of particular psychological skills and strategy use is dependent upon the perception towards the strategy. It is probable that the perceived complex cognitive strategies, for example mental imagery, are perceived to be the responsibility of the psychology-titled professional whereas goal setting techniques are more acceptable as being within the role of the strength and conditioning specialist. Such an attitude has previously been observed within physiotherapy (Ninedek & Kolt, 2000) and athletic training (Hamson-Utley et al., 2008), i.e. that particular cognitive strategies such as mental imagery are unimportant however strategies such as goal setting were viewed as very important.

127

The resistive attitude may be owing to a number of factors. Firstly it is likely that strength and conditioning coaches simply do not have the required understanding of the application of mental imagery techniques. Therefore sufficient training and opportunities for practical experience should be offered. Coaches may have little confidence in achieving a desired outcome, therefore sufficient supervised experience should be provided with palpable outcome measures highlighted as performance indicators.

A further reason could be that the uses of increasingly complex cognitive strategies such as mental imagery are viewed as being outside the role of the strength and conditioner and within the realm of the sport psychologist, and as such may receive an amount of stigma attached to the use of such skills. Stigma tolerance has previously been documented as a predicting factor of intentions to implement psychological skills (Martin et al., 1997; Martin et al., 2004; Gee, 2010).

The intentions to use particular strategies therefore appear to be shaped through a combination of knowledge of applications and the perceived social acceptance of utilising such skills with respect to both the receptivity of the athletes and the opinion of significant others, for example, fellow coaches or sporting directors. Given that the intentions to use psychological strategies and frequency of use has been hypothesised to relate to previous experience promoted through positive experience the notion that factors are inhibiting the desire to approach psychological skill utilization is problematic and the exact reasons warrant further exploration.

128

It is possible that cultural acceptance, is an influential factor in a person‘s intention to use psychological strategies. Similarly, as is the potential barriers of knowledge and athlete acceptance, or rather the amount of control the coach can demonstrate regarding the successful administration of psychological skills training. Regarding the proposed reasons of cultural acceptance and perceived control in successfully implementing psychological strategies it is worthy to discuss this in relation to the Theory of Planned Behaviour as proposed by Ajzen (1991).

The Theory of Planned behaviour assumes three determining factors that account for an individual‘s intended behaviour. The first factor is attitude towards the behaviour and refers to the extent the individual has a favourable judgement towards the behaviour. This could be shaped by the individual‘s opinion of the effectiveness of psychological skills. The second component is termed subjective norm, a social factor referring to the perceived social pressured to execute the behaviour. Within the current example, this is likely to be shaped by a negative stigma towards the use of psychology within strength and conditioning. The third and final component consists of perceived behavioural control. This relates to the perceived ease of executing an action and is presumed to be influenced by previous experiences and is interchangeable with the construct of self-efficacy. Within the present context, this could be shaped by a practitioner‘s previous experience providing the requisite skills to administer psychological skills training programmes as part of strength and conditioning practice. Similarly a threat to behavioural control would be the concept of time and the perception of resources

129

to allow the integration of psychological skills within a strength and conditioning session

Self-efficacy is grounded in internal cognitive factors regulating an individual‘s control over a task, whereas behavioural control reflects more general factors. Furthermore researchers have favoured the measure of self-efficacy rather than planned behavioural control (De Vries et al., 1988), and comparisons of theories of planned behaviour and social cognitive theory have demonstrated self- efficacy, rather than perceived behavioural control, to have a direct impact on behaviour (Dzewaltowski et al., 1990). An additional limitation is the normative component. The normative component is regarded as the weakest predictor of behaviour within the model. (Armitage & Conner, 2001). The inclusion of a single global construct presents problems as varying facets of normative behaviour (i.e. descriptive, subjective and moral norms) have been presented to be independently predictive of behaviour (Conner & Armitage, 1998). Nonetheless, the Theory of Planned Behaviour has been demonstrated to account for 27% of variance of behaviour and 39% of the variance of intentions when appraised via literature review and meta-analysis (Armitage & Conner, 2001). As such it provides a foundation from which to explore the detailed reasoning accounting for the utilisation of psychological skills and strategies in strength and conditioning.

Jedlic et al. (2007) concluded that coaches encouraged the use of imagery more frequently with higher level athletes than those competing at a lower level. However the present study failed to yield significant difference in imagery use between coaches working with differing athlete levels. This is possibly owing to

130

the nature of the discipline; coaches working with athletes in both modes were reported to encourage the use of imagery in a competition setting compared to practice (Jedlic et al., 2007).

An important consideration is the time demands required for the athlete to become adept at using prescribed imagery strategies. Athletes may perceive imagery as an ineffective tool, causing practitioners to have a negative attitude towards the use of imagery, as was observed in a sample undergoing physiotherapy rehabilitation (Francis et al., 2000).

With the strength and conditioning practitioner being concerned with training it is possible that use of imagery, and indeed other psychological strategies, are undervalued and perceived less relevant to training compared to competition. This is reflected in various studies where mental skills have been shown to be used less in training compared to competition (Frey et al., 2003; Taylor et al., 2008). The perceived lack of importance of psychological strategies in practice has been identified previously and serves as a concern that skills are being used less in a practice setting. Durand-Bush and Salmela (2002) have identified that the use of psychological strategies by expert performers are shaped through practice, during daily activities and in conjunction with training activities. This would imply that the strength and conditioner could play a critical role in the development of psychological skills with transfer of psychological skills into competition to compliment physical development.

131

Thus whilst particular skills can be utilised in training, for example to improve motivation or to facilitate technique acquisition, such skills have direct applications towards competition, with parallels existing concerning the need to focus attention, increase confidence or to regulate anxiety during competition. Consequently, the benefits of being adept at utilising psychological skills in competition is a crucial component of success and as such should be afforded time during practice to refine such skills. Therefore, the regular time spent with the strength and conditioner is a vital time to aid athletes‘ development of psychological skills.