International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology Vol. 9, No.

3, September 2011, 251 266

The effect of biofeedback on tennis service accuracy

Shaun M. Galloway
SSPAL-School of Sport, Performing Arts and Leisure, Gorway Road, Walsall, WS1-3GB, UK (Received 16 February 2009; nal version received 2 April 2010) This paper presents a study which seeks to extend the Five-step approach to mental training incorporating biofeedback (BFB) later renamed the Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating BFB. In particular, this study investigated the effectiveness of BFB training, through each of the ve phases, on the accuracy of tennis serving. The participants were six male junior national elite tennis athletes. The results showed that the biofeedback training was effective in improving tennis serve accuracy. Social validation results indicated that the participants mental skills adherence was improved and that the athletes were content with their serving accuracy results. Manipulation checks, throughout the ve phases, gave some insight into the inner workings of the Wingate ve-step approach to mental training. These ndings extend the Wingate ve-step model. Practical implications are that phase 2 needs to be considered with caution and that there appears to be a positive stabilization of performance after the cessation of the Wingate ve-step protocol. Keywords: Wingate ve-step approach; elite junior tennis athletes; longitudinal single- subject study

Biofeedback (BFB) training has become an area of interest for applied sport psychologists; however, there is much work to be completed before there becomes a strong body of knowledge. By itself, biofeedback has not proven to be useful technique in bettering sports performance (Kirkcaldy & Christen, 1981; Roberts, 1985). However, BFB training as a multi-modal package has shown positive ndings in relation to sport performance (Bar-Eli, Dreshman, Blumenstein, & Weinstein, 2002; Blumenstein & Bar-Eli, 1998). As Tenenbaum, Corbett, and Kitsantas (2002) have noted, it is important to differentiate between the terms biofeedback and biofeedback training. Biofeedback is the use of sophisticated equipment to note psychophysiological responses through visual or auditory feedback. Where as, BFB training involves the systematic training of a participant in controlling their anatomic responses with the use of BFB measurement tools, in relation to a certain environment: in this case the sporting environment (Blumenstein, Bar-Eli, & Tenebaum, 2002). Biofeedback training related to the regulation of athletes relaxation or arousal states is an area of interest for the athletes, coaches and applied sport psychologists (Blumenstein et al., 2002; Zaichkowsky & Takenaka, 1993). Some typical BFB modalities used in sport are: electroencephalography, electromyography (EMG), galvanic skin response (GSR), skin temperature (TEMP) and heart rate (HR). Incorporating these modalities, Blumenstein, Bar-Eli, and Tenenbaum (1997) developed the Five-step approach to mental training incorporating BFB and

Email: s.galloway@wlv.ac.uk

ISSN 1612-197X print/ISSN 1557-251X online # 2011 International Society of Sport Psychology http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2011.614851 http://www.tandfonline.com

252

S.M. Galloway

later renamed Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating BFB (Blumenstein et al., 2002). The Wingate ve-step approach to mental training follows the general to specic principles of training theory (Blumenstein et al., 2002; Bompa, 1999). Another theme of the Wingate approach is the exibility to be tailored for each individual athlete. This approach can also be found in Hanins (2000) individual zone of optimal functioning. A brief overview of the Wingate vestep approach will follow. Phase 1, called the introduction, teaches the athletes how to use the BFB equipment as well as the VCR equipment for analyzing performance and mental states. Phase 2, called identication, seeks to nd the athletes most efcient response to the equipment, in relation to the sport. For example, a sport karate athlete needs to be able to control arousal and relaxation throughout the course of a kimute match as well as maximizing reaction time ability (Galloway, 2006). Therefore, it would be useful to use Galvanic skin response as well as simple and complex reaction time equipment. Phase 3, called simulation, uses video coverage to practice the use of the various sport psychology techniques during the appropriate times dictated by the nature of the sport. It has been suggested that phase 1, 2 and 3 to take place in a lab or quite place away from the training facilities (Blumenstein et al., 2002). Another important difference between phases 1 3 and 4 5 is the use of portable BFB equipment during phases 4 5. Phase 4, the transformation phase, prepares the athlete for upcoming competition. Practicing prepreparation mental training regimes are the focus as well as preparing for problem situations which could arise. Throughout phases 1 4 there was the use of a self-regulation test (SRT) that allows the athletes to gauge the gains made. The nal phase, realization, has the athlete use the BFB program during the actual competition. At this point the athlete personalizes the program to match their needs. In most cases, this would be pre-competition regulation and during natural breaks in performance (Blumenstein et al., 1997). Throughout the course of the Wingate program the BFB modalities are solely there to facilitate traditional sport psychology techniques focusing on self-regulation of the autonomous system. The techniques suggested by Blumenstein and colleagues are: Jacobsons progressive relaxation script (1974), Luthe and Schultzs autogenic training (1969) as per Alekseevs modication (1982), and Suinns (1984) visual motor behavioral rehearsal (VMBR). Blumenstein and colleagues suggest using: Jacobsons progressive relaxation and Schultzs autogenic training for the relaxation components of the multimodal package and Suinns VMBR for the activation or excitation component. This study also included Raiports (1987) activation training, which is similar to autogenic training, with the exception being that it incorporates key words that are associated with a physiological activation state. Another add-on to this multimodal package was the inclusion of centering as dened by Tohei (1980). The Tohei (1980) method differs from traditional centering in that it requires raising up onto the ball of the feet during the inhalation and lowering down to slight knee exion during the exhalation. A general gap in applied sport psychology literature has been the use of sport psychology intervention packages applied to junior athletes. Rogerson and Hrycaiko (2002) made a call for research using younger athletes as the intervention might be more easily utilized and developed. Recently, Bar-Eli and Blumenstein (2004) extended the Wingate model to include both physical education students and young-level participants: ages 16 18. This study provided support for the efcacy of BFB training in enhancing young physical education students short sprint times. As suggested, further examination is needed to assess the effects of age with regards to mental skills package and BFB (Bar-Eli & Blumenstein, 2004). This study will attempt to ll the void in relation to the Wingate ve-step approach methodology focusing on the: length of each phase, acceptance of the program due to age, practicality of the program, perception of each phase by the participants, effect of the program on service accuracy and long lasting effect of the Wingate approach after cessation of the program for 10 trials

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

253

afterward. To date there have been no studies which focus on the length of Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating BFB or the analysis of post intervention effects.

Method Participants Six national junior elite male tennis players from Western Canada participated in this study. Informed consent was obtained from their parents, the coaches and the players. For this study a national elite player is dened as an athlete who competes nationally and international, with the key criteria being that they have been invited to participate in either the indoor or outdoor National championships. Invitation is based on points gained through key tournaments prior to the National Championships. Their ages ranged from 13 to 14. Participants were selected on the basis of the following criteria: (a) they expressed interest in a long-term mental training package, (b) they agreed to complete home work based on mental skills, (c) the participants had no ongoing individual sport psychology sessions, (d) they agreed to complete the serve evaluation procedure throughout the course of the program and (e) they agreed to work on their serve only during the designated service training times which were set by the coach and the researcher.

Setting and apparatus This study was conducted during the spring season, just after the indoor junior tennis national championships. The participants practiced skills 4 5 times a week, with 2 3 tness sessions a week. This time was chosen, as there was a large enough gap to develop the BFB mental training package before the outdoor season. All data collection was completed on an outside court. The biofeedback equipment used was Mind peak wave rider jr.TM (Petaluma, USA) and Thought technology GSR/Temp 2XTM, GSR and MyoTrac TM (Montreal, Canada). The tennis balls used were Slazenger Wimbledon out of the canister. All services were recorded using two Sony digital video cameras (model number DCR-TRV33E) and then analyzed using Simio Motion TwinTM (Unterschleissheim, Germany). The cameras were set out as per Figure 1. There were only two cameras used; however, they were moved to the various positions on the court as required.

Independent variable The independent variable consisted of the Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating Biofeedback (Blumenstein, Bar-Eli, & Collins, 2002). The various psychology skills used during the biofeedback package were: Jacobsons progressive relaxation; Schultzs autogenic training; Suinns VMBR; Raiports activation training and Toheis centering. An intervention manual was designed to help the athletes remember how to use the taught interventions during the time that they trained the mental skills away from the sport psychologist.

Dependent variable An objective measurement of each serve was analyzed through video recording of each participants service evaluation. The task required the athlete to complete 20 serves. Ten services were completed from the left and right serving positions on the baseline. On each of the two sides, ve serves were completed to the wide out position and ve services were completed down the T. Each of the four-service areas were 1 m long 30 cm wide (measured from the outside part of the line and the lines were the same width as the court lines). The service line

254

S.M. Galloway

Figure 1. Camera and line set-up for measurement of serves.

area that was not part of the court lines was completed in the same width as the court lines. Serves were counted in if they touched any part of the service area.

Experimental design A single subject, multi-element design was employed to evaluate the effectiveness of BFB (Martin & Pear, 1996). The baseline was established before starting the intervention package. The sixth participant was used as the control as he was not able to be involved in the intensive program during this phase of his training. As a result participant 6 received the intervention package later on in the competition season. In the rst two phases of the Wingate ve-step approach, the serve was completed and then the participant completed one simulated return. They then prepared for the next serve as if their return was a winner. The order of the 20 serves was two serves from one side of the court to both of the service areas and then two serves from the other side of the court to the other two service areas. This was completed ve times for a total of 20 serves. Phases 3 to 5 were completed with an opponent and after the serve the play would continue until the point was over. The participant would then serve again regardless of who had won the point, until they had completed all 20 serves. The service order was the same as in phases 1 and 2 except that the participant could choose which area they could serve to on the rst serve. The second serve would be to the opposite serving area. Throughout phases 3 to 5 they would

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

255

have only one chance to serve to a specic area unless the serve hit the top of the net cord. All other options resulted in either a successful serve or a non-successful serve. After the intervention package was delivered there was a post intervention phase completed exactly like phases 3 to 5. The post intervention phase lasted between 7 and 9 sessions over 2 3 weeks. Similar to the Patrick and Hrycaiko (1998) study a questionnaire was used directly after each serving session to ascertain to what extent the multi-modal mental skills were used. Findings were used as manipulation checks to make sure that the participants were using the skills introduced during the course of the ve-step approach. This information also provided the ability to pin point which skills were used within the mental skill package. Data analysis Data analysis was conducted using visual inspection (Martin & Pear, 1996). Visual inspection consists of three phases: (a) inter-observer measurement on the dependant variable, (b) inspect whether or not the treatment had an effect on the dependant variable, and (b) checking to see if the results are consistent with existing data, theories and percentage of overlapping data points. Clinical relevance of the intervention package had both participants and coaches complete a post-study questionnaire to check the social validity of the intervention package. The post-study questionnaire followed the format suggested by Wolf (1978). Social validity was assessed asking following questions (see Table 3): (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Were the procedures acceptable to you? Were you satised with the results? How important is it for you to improve your serve? How important is it for you to improve the consistency of serve? Did you improve consistently between each of the different phases? Please comment on the phase in general what you liked and what you didnt like?

Procedure The focus of the intervention was to develop serving consistency and accuracy. This was chosen based on the request of the coaches. The other stipulation was that the coaches wished to have a long-term psychological program, which would be well organized and measured. The author was the applied sports psychologist for this intervention study and at the time did not have a University afliation. As such institutional ethical approval was not considered, however, an ethical release form was used, as it was possible that the data would be used for a published article in the future. To gather data, criterion was set for scoring the data and then inter-observer reliability (IOR) scores were collected over three simulated matches. Three assistants were involved in measuring the data: both coaches and a provincial tennis umpire. There were only two observers during the measuring of the data at any one time. Pearson product moment correlation method was used for IOR. Intervention The multi-modal mental skills package consisted of excitation, relaxation, imagery and centering. The skills were learnt using Biofeedback devices to monitor psycho-physiological responses. The ve steps were similar to those outlined in Blumenstein et al. (2002). Phase 1 consisted of 12 sessions per phase. This falls in the 1015 sessions suggested by Blumenstein (2002). The participants practiced in an ofce away from the training environment and not a lab as per Blumenstein. Each session lasted 40 minutes and was intended to familiarize

256

S.M. Galloway

the athletes with the Biofeedback apparatus (EMG, GRS, TEMP and HR) as well as the psychological skills (for a review, see Blumenstein et al., 2002) that were to be used for the duration of the program. Ofce sessions were conducted four times per week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday) at mid afternoon: the only exception being Saturday, which was completed in the morning. All other phases had the exact same mental training schedule: 12 sessions per phase and 4 sessions a week. All phases started and ended with a self regulation test (as per Blumenstein et al., 2002). Phase 2 identied the athletes most efcient BFB response. Though there was variation among the ve participants, EMG and GRS seemed to be the preferred methods used. This work had begun in sessions 10 12 in phase 1. Identication was facilitated by constantly prompting the athletes as where they could best use the equipment and what psychological and physiological indicators could best help in developing their service accuracy (Blumenstein, Bar-Eli, & Tenenbaum, 1995). Phase 3 had the participants practicing mental training with BFB in the natural environment, in this case it was the tennis center. Video of the participants serve was also introduced in this phase. For this study the participants positive serves with good technique were used exclusively. Good technique was dened by the coaches discretion. This included proper starting position, toss, racquet position, height of contact, racquet follow through and body position after serve. As suggested by Blumenstein et al. (2002) relaxation and excitation time periods should match the real situation. This was determined by each participants performance routine prior to serve and the average time between rallies for each participants performance level. In the last four sessions, the use of double feedback of facial expression was used (see Blumenstein, Tenenbaum, Bar-Eli, & Pie, 1995; Blumenstein et al., 2002). This phase lasted 12 sessions and followed the same mental training schedule as the rst phase. Phase 4, called the transformation phase, differs from the other three phases in that it uses portable feedback devices (EMG and GRS) as well as shortened mental training times (between 20 and 25 minutes). The mental training (which predominantly consisted of imagery, centering and selftalk) as well as the BFB was conducted during training, most notably when play is not happening. Phase 5 is the nal phase and is called the realization phase. This phase is similar to phase four, however, the work should be completed in a competition environment. This study used a similar serving schedule to the other four phases, however, after each serve the point would be played out as if it were a normal competition. The measurement of serving accuracy was taken using inter-club tournaments. The only stipulation was that the participants had to serve to all four of the serving areas. They would have the choice of serving to the T or wide out, however, the next serve would have to be to the opposite serving area. This protocol was chosen as the coaches wished the athletes to develop the ability to serve to both sides.

Results Reliability evaluations Inter-observer reliability was assessed at the beginning and the end of each phase of the study. The IOR scores ranged from 90.4 to 97.5%. Kazdin (1982) has suggested that IOR scores greater than 80% are acceptable. Individual intervention effects The effect of the intervention on the participants serving accuracy throughout the various phases inclusive of all participants and the difference between serving accuracy from baseline through the ve phases and the post intervention phase is shown in Figure 2. The change in service accuracy, based on the difference between the previous phase can be seen in Table 1.

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

257

Figure 2. Participants service accuracy during baseline, the ve phases of the intervention and the post intervention phase.

258

S.M. Galloway

Figure 2. (continued).

Participant 1s (P1) baseline was variable; however, the intervention was started on a downward spike. From baseline to phase 1 shows that the data had an immediate moderate decreasing effect in serving accuracy. Phase 1 to phase 2 showed an immediate moderate upward effect with some overlapping data points due to the one large data point found in phase 1. Phase 2 to phase 3 showed the second biggest positive jump in service accuracy. The rst two data points were the lowest in the intervention package, however, this trend abruptly turned consistently positive. Phase 3 to phase 4 followed a similar pattern to the previous phases. There was a downward trend followed by a large upward effect, which then stabilized. Phase 4 to phase 5 showed no

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

Table 1. Differences in serving accuracy between phases. Participants Phases Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Post Baseline Post Intervention Difference P1 2 1.28 2.8 3 2 4.8 2.6 2.3 5.28 9.90 + 4.62 P2 2 0.87 1.6 1.4 2.2 2 0.2 0.5 5.87 8.70 + 2.83 P3 2 3.26 4.8 2 2.4 1.8 22 2.4 11.66 13.00 + 1.34 P4 2 1.89 1.4 1.8 0.6 2 0.8 2 0.2 10.09 11.00 + 0.91 P5 2 0.5 1.8 0.36 2.84 2 0.2 2 0.4 5.5 9.40 + 3.9 P6 5.41 2 0.21 4.46 2 1.2 2 0.2 2 1.5 5.41 5.10 2 0.31

259

Group means (P6 excluded) 2 1.56 2.48 0.832 0.528 2 0.12 0.92 7.3 9.51 2.21

specic trend and absolutely no difference from the previous phase in service accuracy. The nal comparison of phases, revealed a large positive effect between phase 5 and the post intervention. Overall, P1 had the biggest increase in service accuracy with a difference of + 4.62. However, it is also interesting to note that P1 started out with the lowest service accuracy of the group at 5.28 service in out of 20 serves. Participant 2 (P2) showed small improvement throughout all phases the exceptions being baseline to phase 1, moderate downward effect, phase 3 to phase 4 moderate upward effect and phase 4 to phase 5, small downward effect. Participant 2s start baseline slightly better than P1 and improved + 2.83 by the end of the study. Participant 3 (P3) had mixed performance throughout the different phases. However, this participant was also the strongest server (M 11.66) and thus gains could possibly reach a ceiling effect (Franklin, Allison, & Gorman, 1996). The most notable phases were baseline to phase 1 which had a relatively large downward trend, which was followed, by phase 1 to phase 2 which had a large upward effect. Participant 4 (P4) showed similar effects to that of P2. A moderate downward effect from baseline to phase 1, followed by moderately upward trends from phase 2 to phase 4. Phases 5 and post showed small downward effects. P4 showed the smallest increase in service accuracy at + .91. Participant 5 (P5) mirrored similar performance to that of P3. The main difference can be seen in the post phase where there was a small downward effect. P5 had the second largest positive increase in serving accuracy at + 3.9. Participant 6 (P6) served as a control for maturation and training effect and showed random results throughout the entire study and was the only participant in the study who ended up with a lower serving accuracy at 2 .31 taken from a comparison between similar length of baseline for the experimental group and post intervention. Group phase intervention effects One of the focuses of this study was to analyze phase-to-phase changes and thus be able to give some practical suggestions to future applied practice using the ve-step protocol. The following analysis will present: change in intercept and change in slope conducted by visual analysis and changes in group mean average per phase (see Table 1). To further augment the statistical data there will be narrative quotes from the participants regarding their opinions of each phase to highlight key concerns for each phase. Baseline to phase 1 saw a moderate drop in intercept (level) in three out of the ve participants. All participants had from moderate-to-large downward slopes. As can been seen in

260

S.M. Galloway

Table 1 there was a very low mean average (M 2 1.56) for the group focusing on increases in serving accuracy. This phase was the only phase in which all the individual participants had noticeably lower serving accuracy compared with the previous phase, in this case the baseline. Similar across all participants was the fact that they did not feel too good being away from the tennis court to learn how to use the equipment in a lab as per Blumenstein et al. (2002, p. 55) suggestion for the phase 1 environment. P2 sums up the general concerns of this phase:
No improvement seen. In fact, felt there was some loss in serve accuracy. I personally was not too happy on getting away from the tennis bubble and being hooked up to various equipment. Got more used to it near the end of this phase. I like all the equipment but the stuff you can just start using right away is the best. No fuss, no muss. (P2)

Phase 1 to phase 2 changes found three of the participants start with a small lower intercept with the other two participants showing no change in intercept or a small increase in intercept. All participants showed large increases in slope. The group mean (M + 2.48) showed very positive group effects in serving accuracy. This phase change was the only phase in which all participants had positive results in comparison to the past phase. During this phase the participants seemed to focus mostly on the equipment and techniques used but P3 made a very poignant statement when they suggested that the positive increase from phase 1 to 2 could be a reaction to the poor performance found in going from baseline to phase 1.
Yah I improved it wasnt too hard considering the last phase. (P3)

Phase 2 to phase 3 was quite random with two negatively lower intercepts and three positively higher intercepts. However, slope angle and magnitude was variable throughout all participants. These results are also conrmed (see Table 1). Furthermore, the participants perceived improvement is also variable. The qualitative comments followed the quantitative assessment in that both assessments revealed variable ndings. This can be best represented by P3 and P4 comments:
Again, this phase reminded me of the rst phase. I didnt feel too comfortable with this phase at the beginning. (P3) I had lots of positive serving going on here. Things started to ow and particularly the centering with skin biofeedback (GSR) and muscle biofeedback (EMG) on the forehead was good. (P4)

Phase 3 to phase 4 followed a similar trend to the previous differences in phases 2 to 3. There were variable levels and magnitude in the levels of the intercept. In general, the slopes all had small positive increases. The one exception would be P3 who had a drop of 2.4 in serving accuracy. The group mean revealed improvement at M + .26. Participants comments were positive in general and mirrored that of the quantitative data.
I had some more positive results, though not as big as the last phase. (P4) There was huge improvement. I felt more consistent. I let go all the tension of everything and just did what I had to do. (P5)

Phase 4 to phase 5 saw a small lowering in intercept with three of the participants as well as a very small increase in intercept for two participants. All participants had either a stable slope (no change) or a very small decreasing slope. With the exception of P1 (who had a big decrease in

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

261

serving accuracy at 3) all the participants had positive gains in their serving accuracy scores. The qualitative questionnaires comments focused on the difference in environment during the transformation phase.
The change in places was hard to get used to. I have my own ways to deal with things but with all these new things Ive learnt I needed more time to get used to the changes. (P3)

Phase 5 to post intervention saw variable intercepts with small changes in magnitude, however, nearly all slopes were stable or in P1 case slightly increasing. The group means suggested that there was slight increase in serving accuracy compared to the previous phase (M .92). The qualitative questionnaire showed that the participants all thought that their performance was relatively stable and consistent. The rst quote supports the consistency statement and the second quote reveals an important nding to the overall efcacy of the total program.
Overall, the consistency of my serve was improved. I think my serve was strong before but I used to have lots of ups and downs and now I think I have control over what I do and when I do it. (P3) When I was left to my own, I could always use the equipment and get help with our sport psych guy but it wasnt as regimented and I didnt like that. So this phase was too free for me. On the other side we are always being told to nd our own resources so thats what is going on here and that is a good thing. (P4)

Baseline to post intervention found a large positive change in intercept, with small increasing slopes. In all the group mean increase was 2.76, almost a three-serve increase. The nal question on the manipulation check questionnaire asked, any other comments? which invariably lead to a summary on the whole program. These are some of the views of the program in general from the participants.
I had never done sport psychology stuff before. This was a great base and I feel like I have a lot of tools , the sport psych taught me this term . to work with. Though it was a long program I feel I could practice this stuff for a long time and still not be a master of it. A couple techniques are working really well. (P2) The ve step method took some time but I liked it a lot. It wasnt easy but I got to compete against myself during the biofeedback testing (researcher clarication: SRT). I liked the idea of being able to control my psychology, I felt like I could get it done physically and mentally. I had to training mentally the same way I would train physically but the results were there and that lead to consistency. A great program. (P4)

Group SRT results It is beyond the scope of this study to analyze individual SRT results, however, group SRT results are presented to support the efcacy of the Wingate ve-step protocol throughout the rst four phases. Results indicate that the group was successful in controlling the various modalities self-regulation test (See Table 2).

262 S.M. Galloway

Table 2.

Self-regulation test (SRT) for all participants. Physiological responses HR % Optimal Successful 93 74 87 Not successful 7 26 13 Optimal GSR % Successful 87 65 77 Not successful 13 45 33 Optimal EMG % Successful 91 84 72 Not successful 9 16 28

Baseline (rest) Arousal (tension) Warmth (relaxation)

Note: Optimal directions are set per Blumenstein et al. (2002). Only phases 1 4 are calculated (4 SRT test per participant per phase).

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

Table 3. Social validation responses from participants. Participants Questions Service importance Service consistency Did you enjoy the training? Are you satised with the results? P1 5 5 4 5 P2 5 4 4 5 P3 3 5 4 4 P4 5 4 5 4 P5 5 4 5 5

263

Group Means 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.6

Social validation results The responses indicated that the participants were highly committed as seen by serving importance (M 4.6) and serving consistency (M 4.4) on a ve-point likert scale, 1 not important and 5 very important. Further investigation into the efcacy of the program showed similar results. The athletes enjoyed the training (M 4.4) and were satised with the results (M 4.6). Coaches results echoed those of their athletes. The coaches thought the serve was important to these particular athletes (M 4.5); the serving consistency was important (M 5) and were satised with the results (M 4.5). Both coaches in the study did have comments with concern to the length of the program.
I thought that this program took a long time but we wanted to use a long term program as I feel that mental skills must be drilled like physical skills. Also the age of these athletes gives them exibility. They are open right now so it was important to overload them in mental skills I like the biofeedback because they could compete with themselves during the self regulation tests. The mental skills became reality rather than something that might or might not be happening. I would like to shorten the program a little more. Long term training is important but this might have been too long. (C1) The program was very good, systematic. It followed training theory. Must be more short and then the sport psychologist can help athletes one on one more often. (C2)

Manipulation checks Manipulation checks revealed that the participants used the mental skills taught 84% of the time throughout the course of the study and 76% of the time post study. Their homework training, using the biofeedback equipment was used 89% of the time during the study and 65% of the time post study.

Discussion The purpose of this study was to attempt to answer questions in relation to the Wingate ve-step approach methodology, the effects of the biofeedback on service accuracy and the post intervention residual effects of the program. The effects of the program saw increases in serving accuracy throughout most of the steps in the program, the exception being baseline to phase 1 which is completed in the laboratory and phase 4 to phase 5. Qualitative results suggest that a possible reason for the poor performance for phase 1 was that the participants felt uncomfortable in a formal unknown environment. Anderson and Bushman (1997) support this sentiment by

264

S.M. Galloway

suggesting that laboratory studies can reect internal validity, however, they also suggest that the laboratory environment takes time for the participants to adjust. For phase 5 it is possible that there was a slight decrease in performance due to the transference into the competitive environment. This is best exemplied by one of the participants.
The change in environment was hard to get used to. I have my own ways to deal with things but with all these new things Ive learnt I needed more time to get used to the changes. (P3)

The biggest gains were seen going from phase 1 to phase 2 with an increase of + 2.48 serving accuracy. It is possible that the changes in phase 2 were due to coming back into a familiar environment. However, it is more likely that the participants had started to get used to the equipment and the mental skills over the 12 + sessions that they had gone through. The current ndings also lend support to Bar-Eli and Blumenstein (2004) study where they found that physical education students completing a sprint task had their biggest decrease in sprinting times during phase 2. It is interesting to note that the current ndings differ from Bar-Eli and Blumenstein (2004) who found that BFB would signicantly improve performance after eight sessions. This could be due to the difference in participants and the task being measured: physical education students completing a gross motor action in comparison to elite junior athletes completing a motor skill (combination of both gross and ne motor action) (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008). The length of the current program and its efcacy lend support to Galloway, Davies, and Scotts (2006) ndings, which suggest that single-subject designs which had more data points (longer baseline and intervention phases) would result in larger effect sizes. This also supports Weinberg and Comar (1994) suggestion that the average length of a psychological intervention phase should be between three to six months. The current study resulted in an average effect size of 78% efciency for the experimental group using percentage of non overlapping data points (Scruggs, Mastropieri, & Casto, 1987). This is above the average efciency of 61.62% found in the meta analysis of 30 single-subjects studies and 63 effect sizes focusing on sport psychology interventions (Galloway et al., 2006). The coaches in the study found the psychological skills program to be useful and were satised with the results. While both coaches realized that mental skills need to be trained similar to physical skills they did want to nd ways to decrease the length of the total program. This echos the ndings of Gould, Medbery, Damarjian, and Lauer (1999) who found that a major concern of junior tennis coaches who wanted to include mental skills training was the lack of time. The current study has practical implications and limitations with regards to generalization. Practically, it appears that the Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating BFB can increase the serving accuracy of junior elite male tennis players. An interesting feature of this study is the relatively stable performance during the post intervention phase. This suggests that the program can be sustained by the athlete after the absence of the sport psychologist. Another interesting aspect of the study is the long duration of the study. However, the length the intervention makes it difcult to conduct a large-scale study. As a result single-subject methodology was used. More studies will be needed to be able to generalize more widely. Future research should seek to try and cut down on the amount of sessions. The Wingate ve-step approach for mental training incorporating biofeedback is a program which has been commented on for its exibility, however, it is possible that the prescribed program needs to be stream lined and consideration given to phase 1 when working with children.

References
Alekseev, A. (1982). To overcome oneself. Moscow: Physical Culture and Sport.

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

265

Anderson, C.A., & Bushman, B.J. (1997). External validity of trivial experiments: The case of laboratory aggression. Review of General Psychology, 1, 19 41. Bar-Eli, M., & Blumenstein, B. (2004). The effect of extra-curricular mental training with biofeedback on short running performance of adolescent physical education pupils. European Physical Education Review, 10, 123 134. Bar-Eli, M., Dreshman, R., Blumenstein, B., & Weinstein, Y. (2002). The effect of mental training with biofeedback on the performance of young swimmers. Applied Psychology An international Review, 51, 567 581. Blumenstein, B. (2002). Biofeedback applications in sport and exercise: Research ndings. In B. Blumenstein, M. Bar-Eli, & G. Tenenbaum (Eds.), Brain and body in sport and exercise: Biofeedback applications in performance enhancement (pp. 3754). New York: John Wiley. Blumenstein, B., & Bar-Eli, M. (1998). Self-regulation training with biofeedback in elite canoes and kayakers. In V. Issurin (Ed.), Science and practice of Canoe/Kayak high-performance training (pp. 124 132). Netanya, Israel: Elite Sport Department of Israel, Wingate Institute. Blumenstein, B., Bar-Eli, M., & Collins, D. (2002). Biofeedback training in sport. In B. Blumenstein, M. Bar-Eli, & G. Tenenbaum (Eds.), Brain and body in sport and exercise: Biofeedback applications in performance enhancement (pp. 55 76). New York: John Wiley. Blumenstein, B., Bar-Eli, M., & Tenenbaum, G. (1995). The augmenting role of biofeedback: Effects of autogenic, imagery and music training on physiological indices and athletic performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 13, 343 354. Blumenstein, B., Bar-Eli, M., & Tenenbaum, G. (1997). A ve-step approach to mental training with biofeedback. The Sport Psychologist, 11, 440 453. Blumenstein, B., Bar-Eli, M., & Tenenbaum, G. (Eds.). (2002). Brain and body in sport and exercise: Biofeedback applications in performance enhancement. New York: John Wiley. Blumenstein, B., Tenenbaum, G., Bar-Eli, M., & Pie, J.S. (1995). Mental preparation techniques with elite athletes using computerized biofeedback and VCR. In W.K. Simpson, A.D. LeUnes, & J.S. Picou (Eds.), Applied research in coaching and athletics, annual (pp. 115). Boston, MA: American Press. Bompa, T.O. (1999). Periodization: Theory and methodology of training. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Franklin, R.D., Allison, D.B., & Gorman, B.S. (Eds.). (1996). Design and analysis of single-case research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Galloway, S.M. (2006). An extension of one consultants experience focusing on sport karate. Athletic InsightThe Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 79 84. Galloway, S.M., Davies, K., & Scott, J. (2006, Sept). Meta-analysis of single subject studies in sport psychology, Paper presented at the meeting of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Wolverhampton: Westmidlands. Gould, D., Medbery, R., Damarjian, N., & Lauer, L. (1999). A survey of mental skills training knowledge, opinions and practices of junior tennis coaches. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 28 50. Hanin, Y.L. (Ed.). (2000). Emotions in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Jacobson, E. (1974). Progressive relaxation: A physiological and clinical investigation of muscular state and their signicance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kazdin, A. (1982). Single case research designs. New York: Oxford University Press. Kirkcaldy, B.D., & Christen, J. (1981). An investigation into the effect of EMG frontalis biofeedback on physiological correlates of exercise. International Journal of Sports Psychology, 12, 235251. Luthe, W., & Schultz, J.H. (1969). Autogenic therapy. New York: Grune and Stratton. Martin, G.L., & Pear, J. (1996). Behavior modication: What it is and how to do it (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Patrick, T.D., & Hrycaiko, D.W. (1998). Effects of a mental training package on an endurance performance. The Sport Psychologist, 12, 283 299. Raiport, G. (1987). Red gold. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher. Roberts, A.H. (1985). Biofeedback: Research, training and clinical roles. American Psychology, 40, 938 941. Rogerson, L.J., & Hrycaiko, D.W. (2002). Enhancing competitive performance of Ice Hockey Goaltenders using centering and self-talk. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 14 26. Schmidt, R., & Wrisberg, C.A. (2008). Motor learning and performance. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Scruggs, T.E., Mastropieri, M.A., & Casto, G. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 24 33. Suinn, R.M. (1984). Visual motor behavior rehearsal: The basic technique. Scandinavian Journal of Behaviour Therapy, 13, 131 142.

266

S.M. Galloway

Tenenbaum, G., Corbett, M., & Kitsantas, A. (2002). Biofeedback: Applications and methodological concerns. In B. Blumenstein, M. Bar-Eli, & G. Tenenbaum (Eds.), Brain and body in sport and exercise: Biofeedback applications in performance enhancement (pp. 101122). New York: John Wiley. Tohei, K. (1990). Ki in daily life. Tokyo: Ki No Kenkyukai H.Q. Weinberg, R.S., & Comar, W. (1994). The effectiveness of psychological interventions in competitive sport. Sport Medicine, 18, 406 418. Wolf, M.M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is nding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavioural Analysis, 11, 203214. Zaichkowsky, L., & Takenaka, K. (1993). Optimizing arousal levels. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 511527). New York: Macmillian.