Williams Sarah E, Guillot Aymeric, Di Rienzo Franck, Cumming Jennifer
a School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences , University of Birmingham , Edgbaston , Birmingham , B15 2TT , UK.
b Centre de Recherche et d'Innovation sur le Sport , Université Claude Bernard - Lyon 1 , Lyon , France.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2015;15(8):703-11. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2015.1051133. Epub 2015 Aug 27.
The present study investigated the relationship between two of the most common measures of motor imagery ability, self-report ratings, and chronometric assessment. This was done for three types of imagery modalities: external visual imagery (EVI), internal visual imagery (IVI), and kinesthetic imagery (KI). Measures of imagery ability (i.e. self-report and mental chronometry) were also compared across skill levels. Participants (N = 198) completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) to generate self-report ratings. Chronometric assessment was obtained by recording the duration of each MIQ-3 movement imaged and physically performed and then calculating a discrepancy score. There were no significant correlations between self-report and mental chronometry for any of the three motor imagery types (p > .05). When assessing the different types of motor imagery ability using self-report ratings, elite athletes had significantly higher KI than IVI, which was in turn significantly higher than EVI (p < .05). When assessing motor imagery ability using mental chronometry, there were no significant differences in imagery type (p > .05). Findings suggest both measures address different components of MI quality and should be used together to obtain a more comprehensive assessment of motor imagery ability.
本研究调查了运动想象能力的两种最常见测量方法(自我报告评分和计时评估)之间的关系。针对三种想象模态进行了此项研究:外部视觉想象(EVI)、内部视觉想象(IVI)和动觉想象(KI)。还比较了不同技能水平下的想象能力测量指标(即自我报告和心理计时)。参与者(N = 198)完成了运动想象问卷-3(MIQ-3)以生成自我报告评分。通过记录每次在脑海中想象并实际执行的MIQ-3动作的持续时间,然后计算差异分数来获得计时评估。对于三种运动想象类型中的任何一种,自我报告与心理计时之间均无显著相关性(p >.05)。当使用自我报告评分评估不同类型的运动想象能力时,精英运动员的动觉想象得分显著高于内部视觉想象,而内部视觉想象又显著高于外部视觉想象(p <.05)。当使用心理计时评估运动想象能力时,想象类型之间无显著差异(p >.05)。研究结果表明,这两种测量方法涉及运动想象质量的不同组成部分,应一起使用以获得对运动想象能力更全面的评估。