Short-term exercise boosts body image without making any physical difference

Many people find exercise adherence difficult after the first few weeks because the fun of something new has worn off, and yet their programme has yet to deliver any tangible changes in terms of body shape and weight. A new study offers a potential way to galvanise people's motivation during this tricky spell. Katherine Appleton reports that people's body image improves after just two weeks of moderate exercise, even though no physical change has yet materialised. The finding suggests a focus on body image changes could help novice exercisers enjoy early rewards during the early stages of a new programme.

Appleton recruited 34 people (16 men) to take part, all of whom led sedentary lifestyles prior to the study. The effects of two two-week programmes were compared. One involved 3 sessions of 40 minutes reading in a gym per week; the other involved the same time spent exercising in a gym at moderate intensity (getting sweaty and out of breath). Some participants did the reading fortnight first, others did the exercise fortnight first. There was a two-week gap between the intervention fortnights.

The participants filled out body image questionnaires and had their body weight and shape measured at the start and end of the exercise and reading fortnights (the results were hidden from them). The key result is that neither two weeks' exercise or reading made any difference to body weight and shape, but a fortnight of thrice weekly exercise did improve the participants' perceptions of their body. This was true for men and women.

Specifically, despite the lack of any objective change, both men and women reported feeling more satisfied with their looks; feeling more fit, toned and active; healthier; and happier with specific parts of their body (paradoxically, fat anxiety and weight vigilance did not change). In contrast, body image satisfaction dipped slightly after the reading fortnight.

Appleton believes this is the first time body image effects such as this have been documented in the absence of any physical changes. She said this suggests "a focus on body image [rather than other goals] ... may be more rewarding for those embarking on an exercise programme," although she stressed that this needs to be tested. It's a complex issue, she explained, because people can vary in their body image ideals, and in some cases an excess focus on body image can backfire, especially if exercise newbies start comparing themselves to trim regulars at the gym.

There are also some issues with the study methodology. The sample was small and the researcher can't be 100 per cent sure that the participants didn't exercise outside of the allotted gym time (although this wouldn't undermine the main finding of body image change in the absence of physical change). More problematic are the potential effects of researcher contact, and the possibility the participants were giving the answers they thought were expected of them after the exercise fortnight, especially as they were told the study was about the effects of exercise on "various body-related parameters."

_________________________________

Appleton, K. (2012). 6 x 40 mins exercise improves body image, even though body weight and shape do not change. Journal of Health Psychology, 18 (1), 110-120 DOI: 10.1177/1359105311434756

--Further reading--
Is the benefit of exercise a placebo effect?

Post written by Christian Jarrett (@psych_writer) for the BPS Research Digest.

Eye-movement training helps penalty-takers in football feel more in control

One-on-one - the kicker must get the ball past the goal keeper

Ties in international football tournaments are decided by penalties, in which a series of kickers attempt to get the ball past the keeper in a one-on-one situation. It's a high stress situation and missing a penalty is the low point of many a career.

Some coaches believe it's impossible to recreate the pressure of the penalty situation. England manager Glenn Hoddle in 1998 admitted his team hadn't practiced because it was a waste of time. The last manager, Fabio Capello, described penalties as a "lottery." Psychologists would beg to differ.

Research by Greg Wood and Mark Wilson at the University of Exeter shows that penalty takers have more success when they shoot for either of the top two corners of the goal, and more importantly, that accuracy is improved when the kicker focuses for a moment on the spot they want to hit. Where the eyes look, the ball tends to go (video) and the pause is thought to allow pre-programming of the kick to occur. This may sound obvious, but many penalty takers often focus on the goalkeeper, rather than on their intended target.

Now in their latest research into what's known as "the Quiet Eye" method, Wood and Wilson have tested whether, as well as linking the visual and motor systems, the training has a psychological benefit too, helping strikers feel more in control, thus preventing them from choking in a high-pressure situation.

Twenty university-level football players were split into two groups. One group underwent Quiet Eye training for three weeks, taking 10 kicks a week, each time calling out the corner they were aiming for, staring momentarily at their target (for about a second), and then beginning their run up and executing the kick. The other group merely practised the same number of kicks each week (the only advice they received was to aim for the top corners of the goal). All participants wore an eye-tracker while training and the same goalkeeper was used throughout.

Next there was a "retention week" when the players filled-out psych questionnaires after practising the same approach to penalty kicks as before. Then the following week a competitive penalty shoot-out between the two groups provided the crucial test. A £100 prize for the best team helped ramp up the stress levels, and a new goal keeper arrived and was described to them as a specialist at saving penalties. Eye-movements were recorded throughout and more psych questionnaires completed.

The researchers were particularly interested in the players' feelings of control, their expectations of success, and confidence in coping with pressure. The key finding is that all groups showed increases in these measures during the "retention week", but only the Quiet Eye group exhibited these benefits in the competitive situation. Moreover, increases in these feelings of control correlated with the aiming behaviour that Quiet Eye training encourages. The more the players focused on their target, the more in control they felt. Although these feelings of control didn't correlate with performance, only the Quiet Eye training group showed improvements in performance during the competitive situation compared with baseline.

The study has its limitations, as the authors acknowledged. For example, it's possible the Quiet Eye training led to more feelings of control and confidence under pressure simply because it was a more detailed training format than the simple practise routines that the other group went through. Also, the Quiet Eye group didn't actually report less anxiety than the other group (that said, the eye movement training increased feelings of control, and players who felt more in control generally felt less anxious). Finally, can we be sure that the Quiet-Eye group's calling out of their targets during training didn't play any part in their later feelings of control?

These issues notwithstanding, the researchers concluded: "the results of this study show that the benefits of Quiet Eye-training transcend visuomotor control adaptations, and can have a positive impact on the control beliefs of the performer."

_________________________________

Greg Wood, and Mark R. Wilson (2012). Quiet-eye training, perceived control and performing under pressure. Psychology of Sport and Exercise DOI: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.05.003

-Further reading-
Don't jump! Advice for goalkeepers from economic psychology
How to practise penalty shoot-outs

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.

Targets look bigger after a shot that felt good

Bigger targets are easier to hit, obviously. But did you know this relationship works backwards? That is, targets that we consider hittable look bigger as a result. The finding is consistent with James Gibson's Theory of Affordances, whereby the ways we can use our bodies to interact with the environment affects our perception of that environment.

Yang Lee at Gyeongsang National University in South Korea, and his colleagues, began their study by asking nine experienced archers to fire at targets of five different sizes located 50 meters away. After they released each arrow, the participants were instructed to turn their heads so that they couldn't see the path of their shot. Upon each arrow hitting home, a screen was also pulled across to prevent the archers from seeing how successful they'd been.

After each shot, the archers chose which of 18 miniature targets on a card most closely matched the size of the target they'd just fired at. The size of the miniatures went from 10mm diameter to 27mm, designed to represent the apparent size of the real target, as seen from a 50m distance.

Although they couldn't see the success of the shots they'd fired, the archers' judgements of the size of the targets was related to the accuracy of their shots. In fact, their size judgments were more strongly related to their accuracy than they were to the actual size of the targets. Specifically, targets were perceived as bigger after a more accurate shot, even though the archers had no access to objective feedback about their performance.

Lee and his colleagues think that archers are able to tell how hittable a shot is based on bodily feedback about their form and chances of success. If a target is hittable then it is adaptive (i.e. useful in an evolutionary sense) that it should be perceived as larger. To test this idea, a second study involved 20 novices preparing to shoot arrows at targets located 50m away. In this study, the participants didn't actually fire the arrows. After each drawing of an arrow, they stopped and estimated the size of the distant target. The crucial twist was that some arrows were drawn back with the aid of a stabilising tripod and some weren't. The aim of the stabiliser was to provoke the sense in the archers, based on bodily feedback, that they had a better chance of hitting the target. In turn this was expected to affect their perception of the targets. That's exactly what was found - targets were perceived to be larger after they'd been viewed in the context of a stabilised draw back.

These intriguing new findings add to a growing literature linking performance with size estimations - for example, it's also been shown that golf putters perceive holes as bigger after a successful putt.

_________________________________

Lee Y, Lee S, Carello C, & Turvey MT (2012). An Archer's Perceived Form Scales the "Hitableness" of Archery Targets. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance PMID: 22731994

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.

Olympics Feast Special

As we enter the home straight towards the close of the 2012 Olympics, here's a handy links round-up:

Fancy becoming a sports psychologist? There are plenty of pointers in this video, plus lots more resources from the BPS Going For Gold sports psychology portal.

Does wearing red really boost your chances of winning in sport? Tom Stafford weighs the evidence.

Hosting a major sporting event - economic gains are unlikely, but will it bring happiness?

The Psychology of Stamina (pdf).

There's still time to watch The Bad Boy Olympian that aired on BBC 3 (2 days left to view).

Have you started BIRGing (basking in reflected glory) yet? This article examines the psychology of competition, including how fans are affected by their team's performance. Also, check out these psychologists reflecting on what the Games mean to them, and this article on what sports psychology has done for the mainstream discipline.

Using Twitter to monitor real-time emotional responses to the Games.

It's a run of three hits or wins that particularly makes us think a person or team is on song.

We think about psychological momentum in sport in terms of the laws of physics.

Why Bronze medallists are usually happier than Silver.

Why don't we watch more women's sports?

From the Psychologist magazine archive - Dave Collins, Performance Director at UK Athletics, on how he will be putting his background in psychology to use in pursuit of medals in Beijing.

Matthew Syed investigates the psychology of the home advantage (radio show available to listen again on iPlayer).

Olympic athletes reveal their mental strategies.

How do women and girls feel when they see sexualised or sporty images of female athletes? (and check this - what if every sport were photographed like women's beach volleyball?)

Is it wrong to, ahem, admire the bodies of the athletes? asks Zoe Williams.

Winning Gold - comparing media coverage in the US and Japan (during the Sydney and Salt Lake City games).

An interview with Steve Peters - "sports psychiatrist" to the all-conquering Team GB cycling team.

Swifter, higher, stronger: The history of sport psychology.
_________________________________
   
Post compiled by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.

Race and foul judgments in football - it's not black and white

Racism continues to cast its ugly shadow over football. As the European Football Championships kick-off today, the British government has advised fans of Asian or Afro-Caribbean descent to "take extra care" when in Ukraine, host nation with Poland. Meanwhile, England defender and ex-captain John Terry awaits his trial for alleged racism. Against this background, a team of Swiss psychologists has just published a preliminary investigation into the potential effect of racial prejudice on fans', players' and referees' judgements about the severity of fouls by Black and White players.

Pascal Gygax and his colleagues presented 43 White football players, 17 White referees and 22 White football fans with 64 challenge sequences created with the Xbox 360 console game Fifa 2005. Each sequence featured one player tackling another, and the clips had been rated by independent judges as ambiguous as regards the legality of the challenge. Players in the clips were White or Black and wore either green or white shirts. After watching each clip (between one and two minutes in length), the participants had to say whether a foul had been committed, and if so, rate its severity.

Based on previous evidence of racial prejudice towards Black athletes, the researchers anticipated that challenges by Black players would be judged harshly, particularly if they were challenges against a White player. Although the results did uncover evidence that race affects people's judgements of fouls, the pattern of results was complicated.

There were signs the participants were sensitive to the risk of appearing biased, in that they were less likely to judge a foul had occurred whenever a sequence involved two players of different skin colour. Referees specifically were less likely to judge that a foul had occurred when a challenge was by a Black player. Paradoxically, participants overall were quicker to decide that a foul had occurred when a challenge was by a Black player, possibly because they harboured implicit expectations that Black players will be more likely to commit fouls.

When it came to the severity ratings, there was evidence for bias against White players - fouls by them were always judged as more serious, perhaps a consequence of compensatory efforts by the participants to appear non-biased. On the other hand, challenges on Black players were rated as less severe than challenges on White players, perhaps indicative of prejudice by the White participants.

"In essence," the researchers explained, "participants have conflicting sources of information which result in differential treatments of White and Black players, at times discriminatory to Black players, and at times to White players." An alternative, more pessimistic explanation put forward by Gygax and his team is that the participants expected Black players to be more aggressive and so raised the threshold for what they considered to be severe when judging their challenges.

The researchers acknowledged the limitations of their study - most obviously that they'd relied on video game clips rather than real-life footage. However, they said they'd uncovered evidence of discrimination in the judgement of football challenges, and that crucially, "those were not always against Black players: thus, differentiation judgments in soccer based on skin colour may not be a black or white judgment."

 _________________________________


WAGNER-EGGER, P., GYGAX, P., and RIBORDY, F. (2012). RACISM IN SOCCER? PERCEPTION OF CHALLENGES OF BLACK AND WHITE PLAYERS BY WHITE REFEREES, SOCCER PLAYERS, AND FANS. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 114 (1), 275-289 DOI: 10.2466/05.07.17.PMS.114.1.275-289

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.

How do women and girls feel when they see sexualised or sporty images of female athletes?

The potentially harmful effect of ultra-thin models and air-brushed female celebrities on the body image and self-esteem of women is well-documented. Could the increasing participation of women in professional sport prompt the media to portray female role models in a different, more beneficial light? Anecdotal evidence suggests not. To take just one example, prior to the 2010 Winter Olympics, female Olympic skiers and snowboarders appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated in - you guessed it - bikinis. A new study of 258 US school girls and 171 female undergrads by Elizabeth Daniels has investigated how women and girls feel when they see sexualised images of female athletes.

The participants were allocated to one of three conditions - they either looked at five images of female athletes in a sporting context in their full sporting attire (the basketball player Anne Strother; the skateboarder Jen O'Brien; the tennis player Jennifer Capriati; the surfer Lisa Anderson; and the football player Mia Hamm), or they looked at five images of female athletes in a sexualised context with lots of flesh on display (the basketball player Lauren Jackson; the ice-skater Ekaterina Gordeeva; the swimmer Jenny Thompson; the softball player Jenny Finch; and the tennis player Anna Kournikova), or they looked at five images of bikini-clad magazine models given random names.

After looking at the first and last of their five allocated photographs (this was Lauren Jackson and Anna Kournikova in the sexualised athletes condition and Anne Strother and Mia Hamm in the sporty athletes condition), the participants were asked to write a paragraph "describing the woman in the photograph and discussing how this photograph makes you feel".

The key finding is that the girls and undergrads who viewed the sexualised athlete images tended to say they admired or were jealous of the athletes' bodies, they commented on the athletes' sexiness, and they evaluated their own bodies negatively. Some also said they found the images inappropriate. The participants who viewed the bikini-clad glamour models responded similarly, except they rarely commented on the inappropriateness of the images, as if they'd come to accept the portrayal of women in that way. Daniels said that sexy images of female athletes "are no more likely to prompt viewers to reflect on their own physical activity involvement or appreciation of sport than sexualised model images."

By contrast, participants who viewed the female athletes in a sporting context tended to comment on the athletes' determination, passion and commitment; they wrote about feeling motivated to perform sport; and they reflected on their own sporting participation or sports they followed. "Infusing more performance images of female athletes into the media may be helpful in promoting physical activity among girls and young women," Daniels said. "Currently, female athletes are largely absent from magazines targeted at teen girls."
_________________________________

Daniels, E. (2012). Sexy versus strong: What girls and women think of female athletes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33 (2), 79-90 DOI: 10.1016/j.appdev.2011.12.002

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.

Could sportsmen and women benefit from "vision training"?

Researchers at the University of Cincinnati have reported dramatic improvements in their baseball team after enrolling the players in "vision training", designed to strengthen and speed the eye muscles and enhance visual processing. Based on their findings, Joseph Clark and his colleagues (including Hall of Fame catcher Johnny Bench) said "there are few sports that could not benefit from some form of vision training."

Thrice weekly 30-minute training sessions began six weeks prior to the 2011 season, becoming twice weekly during the season. There were eight different training exercises, which escalated in difficulty over time.

Here's a flavour of what was involved. With the "Brock string", balls were suspended on an 8-foot string extending from an athlete's nose, parallel to the ground. His task was to switch his focus from near balls to farther balls, thus training convergent movements of the eyes. Another exercise with strobe glasses had the effect of intermittently blinding the athlete as he tracked incoming balls ("the brain is forced to visualise where the pitch is going by processing the information it gets from the eye faster," the researchers said). The "rotary" task required that the athlete track letters and numbers that were spinning round at increasing speed (training smooth pursuit eye movements). The Dynavision exercise involved the athlete tapping targets as quickly as possible as they appeared on a large touch-screen.

Clark and his colleagues stressed that this was an observational study. They had no control group as such. To gauge the success of their training intervention they compared changes in their team's batting performance from the 2010 to 2011 season with changes recorded for other teams in the Big East league. The difference was striking. The batting average of the Cincinnati team showed a substantial improvement, whereas the average for all other teams actually deteriorated slightly, perhaps because of the introduction to the league of new aluminium bats designed to simulate wooden equipment.

The Cincinnati team's "slugging percentage" (a measure of batting power) also increased after the introduction of the vision training, whereas the slugging percentage of all other teams declined over the same period. "On-base percentage", another statistic related to batting performance, also improved in the Cincinnati team while falling in their rivals. The Cincinnati team's final league position was fourth for the 2011 season, up from seventh at the end of the prior season.

The researchers conceded that these batting improvements could in theory have had many causes, including maturation of existing players and the arrival of superior newcomers. However, they argued that there was no reason why these factors should improve performance for the Cincinnati team but not do so for any of their rivals.

"The muscles in the eyes can be trained and conditioned to perform better and faster in focusing and tracking objects such as baseballs," the researchers said - an idea they believe was corroborated by reports of eye muscle soreness among their players.

The time-frame for responding to a baseball pitch is so short, the researchers further explained, that the vision training likely provides batters with "a competitive edge ... a millisecond advantage." There was also some evidence of fielding improvements among the Cincinnati team and here the researchers speculated that "action on the field may appear slower and easier to follow for the vision trained athlete."

So, should other teams in baseball and related sports (the England cricket team, perhaps?) start their own vision training programmes, if they haven't already? Maybe not. These findings do imply that the vision training was beneficial, but there's no evidence here whatsoever that the benefits were mediated by improvements in visual function or enhanced eye movements. No data were presented for changes in the athletes' performance on the training tasks over time, and there was no analysis linking any such changes to the observed improvements in batting performances. For that reason, combined with the lack of a control group or control intervention, it's impossible to rule out the possibility that the observed benefits arose from anything other than a placebo effect.

_________________________________


Clark, J., Ellis, J., Bench, J., Khoury, J., and Graman, P. (2012). High-Performance Vision Training Improves Batting Statistics for University of Cincinnati Baseball Players. PLoS ONE, 7 (1) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029109

Further reading. According to a 2008 Guardian report, the British Olympics Team employ the services of a vision training coach.

Post written by Christian Jarrett for the BPS Research Digest.