does interrogative self ( started editing )

Running Header: EFFECTS OF INTERROGATIVE SELF-TALK ON ENDURANCE PERFORMANCE

The effects of interrogative self-talk on endurance performance in a 10km time trial.

By Gavin Lloyd-Jones

School of Health and Exercise Sciences, Bangor University

Supervisor: James Hardy

EFFECTS OF INTERROGATIVE SELF-TALK ON ENDURANCE PERFORMANCE 2

Declaration

The following report is a presentation of my original research work. Every effort is made to

indicate clearly the contributions of others involved, with due reference to the literature as

well as acknowledgement of discussions and collaborative research. All data collected was

down to solely my efforts at Normal Site, Bangor University. The work was done under the

supervision of Professor James Hardy at the School of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences,

Bangor University.

Signed: ______________ Date: 10/05/16


Contents

1. Introduction Page 4.

2. Methods Page 9.

2.1 Participants Characteristics and Ethics Page 9.

2.2 Study Design and Procedures Page 9.

2.3 Pre Cycle Questionnaire Page 10.

2.4 Familiarisation Page 10.

2.5 Intervention Page 11.

2.6 Statistical Analysis Page 12.

3. Results Page 12.

3.1 Manipulation checks Page 12

3.2 Performance Time Trials Page 13.

3.3 Rate of Perceived Exertion Page 14.

3.4 Power output Page 15.

4. Discussion Page 16.

5. References Page 22.

6. Acknowledgments Page 24.

7. Appendices Page 25.


1. Introduction

Self-talk is a mental skill where an individual will be saying specific statements to induce

a specific behaviour. According to Theodorakis, Weinberg, Natsis, Douma, and Kazakas

(2000) defined self-talk as “what people say to themselves either out loud or as a small voice

inside their head” (p. 254). Following this definition, performance seems as a perfect

dependant variable to measure as self-talk can be closely manipulated to identify its effects

on performance. Previous research has been published on what type of self-talk effects

endurance performance, although the research on how Interrogative self-talk (IS-T) effects

endurance performance specifically, is surprisingly limited.

It is believed that the characteristics of self-talk can have a wide range of effects on

performance. Factors such as what is said, how it is said, and its frequency are just a small

portion of examples. It is already known that the different types of self-talk can have a variety

of effects. For instance ; an investigation looking at instructional self-talk and motivational

self-talk on the participants perceived functions of the two types of self-talk during a

swimming task that included performing breast strokes with various types of self-talk which

showed that it increased the participants attentional focus (Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, 2006).

In addition, Hatzigeorgiadis (2006) suggested that Motivational self-talk increased the

participant’s level of effort in the task which resulted in a better performance. Although the

Motivational self-talk had an increased impact on effort, the Instructional self-talk cue had a

larger impact on the participant’s confidence. In differentiating between the

above ,Hatzigeorgiadis (2006) concluded that Instructional Self-talk was better for improving

attention focus and Motivational Self-talk was better for improving an individual’s drive.

Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, Nikos Zourbanos, Evangelos Galanis, and Yiannis Theodorakis, (2011)

assessed the effects of self-talk on novice tasks and well learned tasks on individuals. They

hypothesized that in novice tasks, there is more room for improvement and that performance


enhancement could be achieved faster compared to well mastered tasks. Accordingly

previous research by Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Theodorakis, Y., & Zourbanos, N.involving (2004)

involving water polo tasks for non-experienced participants found a large enhancement in

performance for non-experience participants (Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Theodorakis, Y., & Zourbanos,

N., 2004). On the other hand, Dennis Landin & Edward P. Hebert (1999) found a relatively small

enhancement in performance in their study on expert tennis players while measuring the

participant’s forehands swings. The support for this theory that novice learning of tasks will

benefit more from self-talk suggests that a participant characteristics, such as level of ability,

can be a strong factor on the effectiveness of self-talk on performance, therefore examining

participants that have little experience of the current study’s task is imperative.

Although participant characteristics and other affecting factors can all contribute to the

effectiveness of self-talk, the idea of task endurance must not be overshadowed by this. It is

suggested that self-talk can be of very good use for participants experiencing psychological

crisis during endurance tasks (Schüler, J., & Langens, T. A. 2007). A study on nine cyclists

by Ryan A. Hamilton, David Scott & Michael P. MacDougalla, (2007) applied three types of self-

talk interventions on cyclists during a 20 minute workout. The Interventions included self-

regulated positive self-talk, assisted positive self-talk, and assisted negative self-talk.

Additionally, previous studies have shown the greatest increase is often found in the assisted

positive self-talk condition (Hamilton et al., 2007). Knowing that assisted self-talk enhanced

endurance in this case, supports my hypothesis as I also intend to give assisted self-talk to my

chosen participants in the form of interrogation. Although the findings of Hamilton et al

(2007) were as expected, the study itself was not based on a specific theory, thus our

understanding of the effects remain limited.

Following the above , a study on self-talk’s influence on performance, specifically

looking at motivational self-talk, assessed trained individuals who exercised on a cycle


ergometer until exhaustion (Blanchfield AW1, Hardy J, De Morree HM, Staiano W, Marcora

SM, 2014). Exhaustion was defined by performing below 60 revolutions per minute for five

5 consecutive seconds despite strong verbal encouragement. The method included a pre-test

and post-test method with 24 participants. Both cycle tests were split between a 2 week

period, including a self-talk intervention or a control phase in that period. As the intervention

occurred within a time scale of 14 days, it is valid to suggest that self-talk could have a

positive impact on endurance as the participant might have practised and mastered the uses of

self-talk during that period. Blanchfield et al study concluded a strong correlation between

perception of effort and endurance performance. Participants were measured on their time to

exertion (TTE) in seconds and their rate of perceived exertion

(RPE), which gave a strong indication of self-talk’s effect on the athlete. The findings of this

study suggested that self-talk significantly reduced RPE, facilitating performance. As the

study exclusively examined Motivational self-talk, further research on other types of self-talk

is necessary to further our understanding of self-talk and its effect on endurance performance,

therefore using Interrogative self-talk seems suitable to discover any new implications that

could further the current understanding.

Joseph Brhem’s (1989) established theory of motivational intensity states that

motivational intensity will narrow attention as oppose to low motivational intensity will

broaden attention (Harmon-Jones, E., 2013). The theory explains how the intensity of

motivation may be a result of high arousal therefore when participants have high arousal, he

or she thrives to achieve a certain motive by increasing self-effort (Brehm, J. W., & Self, E.

A., 1989).In addition, Interrogative self-talk can be seen as a strong branch of Brehm’s theory

as intensity is a key aspect in terms of the effectiveness of this type of self-talk. Knowing this

could have benefit my expected results as the Interrogative self-talk could have seen benefits

from an increase level of motivation as oppose to the Declarative self-talk condition


In terms of measuring RPE and power output, Barwood’s et al (2015) study consisted of a

10 kilometre time trial using motivational self-talk as an intervention. Participants included

14 young men who were recreationally active and accustomed to maximal exercise that was

not cycling. The study included four 10 kilometre time trials which were completed at

different occasions. Participants initially completed 2 familiarisation visits before being

assigned to either the Motivational self-talk group or Neutral self-talk group. Regarding

completion times, the Motivational self-talk proved to be faster in the fourth and final time

trial. In terms of participants rate of perceived exertion, a linearly increase occurred over the

course of each time trial which ended with a peak in both groups in the tenth kilometre. No

significant differences occurred between both groups’ RPE. Finally, power output was larger

in the Motivational self-talk group in the fourth time trial than the Neutral self-talk group.

Knowing that Motivational self-talk has previously induced better performance, looking

into the studies of Senay et al. (2010) as they conducted an investigation into interrogative

self-talk and its effect on goal-directed behaviour will further understanding in this field. The

study consisted of 3 experiments, that all had a different task while implementing self-talk.

All three experiments within this study strongly suggested that asking yourself an internal

question would induce a better performance.

Experiment 1 had 53 participants, with all individuals asked to use two thoughts, either a

question or an assertion, to complete an anagram-solving task. As a result they had to ask

themselves if they were going to complete the task or they were for definite going to

complete the task. Results showed that participants solved more anagrams when they were

told to think whether they would complete anagrams rather thinking they would definitely

complete anagrams .The second experiment within the study had a similar number of

participants of 50 that all had to either write ‘will I’ or ‘I will’ within a proposed handwriting

exercise. They were informed that this task was for handwriting practises. After writing one


of the options on a piece of paper 20 times, they were asked to complete an anagram task

similar to experiment 1. .The third and final experiment that included 46 participants wrote a

sequence or a pattern of 24 numbers in order to clear their minds for the next handwriting

task which included will I or I will. Following this participants had to write their intentions of

any physical activity they were planning on completing that week.

Findings suggested that the ‘will I’ prime produced better performance than any other

prime, while results for other primes had no significant difference .Results from the first

experiment suggested that participants completed the task better by asking themselves if they

were going to complete it rather than telling themselves they were going to. The interrogative

form of self-talk requires an internal answer from the participant which is often answered by

performing better. Again, in experiment two will I prime produced better performance than

any other prime. The third set of results were analysed in a 2 (number-sequence prime:

patterned s. random) x 2 (word prime: will I vs. I will) design and showed that participants

that created patterned sequences had a stronger intention to exercise (Senay et al. 2010).

Regarding the ‘will I’ or ‘I will task’, participants had stronger intentions to exercise when

using will I. The three experiments within this study strongly suggests that asking yourself an

internal question would induce a better overall performance.

As the current task consisted of a time trial on a watt bike, consideration must be took

for external factors that may affect participant’s power output and completion times during

the time trial such as fatigue (Amann. M., Ventruelli. M, Ives. SJ et al, 2013) and the heat

stress (Barwood, M.J., Corbett, J., White, D., James, J., 2012). The aforementioned factors

which may increase physiological stress could have a ‘knock on’ effect as the participants

may perceive the task as harder as a result. To limit any external factors influencing the

participant’s performance, each participant will have the option to have an electric fan on at

any time during the trials to reduce the chances of heat stress. Furthermore, participants will


have at least 2 days to prepare nutritionally for the task, however, protocol requires no

consumption of food 2 hours before the time trial itself. The current study fully intends to

extend the understanding of interrogative self-talk by applying it into motor domains in

particular endurance performance. Previous research has suggested that self-talk can raise

self-awareness during physical activities involving distance and time (Morin, A., 2005)

therefore on this basis, structured type of self-talk (IS-T) could be an altering factor towards

RPE. As well as this, a second hypothesis has been drawn which consists of an increase in

power output due to the use of IS-T and DS-T, however, I believe power output will be

higher in the Interrogative self-talk group.

2. Methodology

Participant Characteristics and Ethics.

The study consisted of 10 participants (9 male and 1 female. Mean Age =23), each

completing 3 visits to the lab completing a 10km cycle on a watt bike which had its resistance

on level 2. All participants had to be at fairly good health and non-smokers. To avoid any

data sampling inconstancies, all participants were asked not to have cycled competitively

prior to the task. In conjunction with this, participants were also required to not have had any

skeletal injuries prior to the task.

Regarding ethics, all participants had signed a consent form to allow the procedures to be

carried out. A brief overview of the task was read out to the participants so that the

procedures of the experiment and requirements were understood. Although an overview of

the experiment and information about the task were given, participants were requested not to

discuss or reveal any information with others prior to study completion.

Study Design and Procedures.

The following protocol was approved by the School of Sport, Health and Exercise

Sciences ethics committee. The study used a repeated measure design in which participants


completed a 10 km time trial on 3 different occasions. They initially completed 1

familiarisation prior to being randomly assigned to either completing the IS-T condition first

or the DS-T first. Tests took place between the hours of 9 am and 5pm during week days at

Padarn Lab, Normal site.

Pre-cycle protocols.

All participants were asked to fill in a consent form (item 1 in appendices) and health

form (item 2 in appendices) that consisted of questions asking about their last meal, any

recent injuries, any current consumption of medication, last consumption of alcohol and if the

participant had engaged in any strenuous exercise in the 48 hours prior to the task. Following

this, a short series of questions was applied with regards to their physical activity (item 3 in

appendices). The reasoning for this was to address any inconsistencies on data sampling as I

may have had participants that were indifferent in terms of fitness across subjects. By gaining

information of each participant’s weekly engagement, it was possible to see if participants

were relatively consistent in terms of fitness. Participants were asked to wear the same light

sport clothing for all three visits. All time trials were conducted in the same laboratory which

had the watt bike situated in the same place at all visits (corners of the watt bike were marked

on the floor with marking tape). The watt bike was externally connected to a laptop that had a

watt bike software that enabled me to view the participants distance covered as well as their

speed. The software allowed each participant to have a separate profile in which all three time

trials could be recorded under the same name.

Familiarisation

All participants in visit one completed the task so that self-talk cues were recorded and

changed into either declarative self-talk or interrogative self-talk on their personal forms

(item 4 in appendices), this visit was labelled as the ‘familiarisation’ visit. First of all,

participants were measured in terms of their height and weight as well as their watt bike


saddle and handlebar height. Participants completed a 10 minute warm in which they

remained between 75 and 95 rpm. After dismounting the watt bike, participants were advised

to stretch leg muscles in particular to limit any muscle damage during the task. After

stretching, participants were asked to remount on to the watt bike to complete the time trial

with maximal effort and as quickly as possible. As participants started the task, they were

informed that RPE would be asked of them and recorded on a form every kilometre (item 5 in

appendices) from the Borg scale of perceived effort which was taped on to the wall in front of

the bike. The watt bike display screen would be tilted forwards once the time trial had started

so that participants had no knowledge of speed or distance completed.

Intervention

Both intervention trials followed the same protocol as the familiarisation visit, the

difference being that either interrogative self-talk or declarative self-talk cues were applied of

course. Participants were given their interrogative self-talk statements at least 5 days prior to

the time trial to ensure that they had been practising the use of the specific statements. By

rehearsing statements participants could memorize the cues to increase the flow of changing

cues every 2 kilometres. Although participants could not see the cues on the day of the time

trial, the experimenter gave them the cues every 2 kilometre to use during the time trial. To

avoid any learning effect, participants were counterbalanced between both conditions

therefore half the participants were intervened with IS-T in the first real visit and the other

half were intervened with DS-T in real visit 1.Participant measurements of saddle height and

handlebar heights were already recorded therefore were set prior to the participant’s arrival.

Prior to the task, participants were informed of the Borg scale which was situated on the wall

in front of them and were told that they were going to be asked every 1km for their perceived

exertion. As the task began, participants were given their first adjusted self-talk cue from the

familiarisation visit (depending on condition) for the first 2 kilometres. For example, a


participant during the Interrogative self-talk condition were given statements such as “have I

started well?” whereas participants in the Declarative self-talk condition were given

statements such as “I’ve started well”. After completing the task, participants were asked to

complete a 10 minute cool down at their own pace to lower heart rate as well as filling in a

series of questions regarding a manipulation check (Item 6 in appendices)

Statistical Analysis

Test completion times, power output, RPE and manipulation were measured during time

trial 2 and 3. Using a computerised statistical software analysis package, SPSS software, both

means and standard deviation were measured for the following variables over each kilometre

of each time trial; completion times (seconds), power output (watts) and RPE (Borg

scale).Completion times were analysed using a paired sample t-test while power output for

each kilometre were compared using a 2x10 repeated measure ANOVA with within subjects

factor Self-Talk and Distance (km). By using the Muchly test to check sphericity, it proved

necessary to use a Greehnhouse-Geisser adjustment. Furthermore, I decided to further

explore the main effect with single repeated measures ANOVA and multiple t-tests and the

significant differences of each kilometre with a Bonferroni multiple comparisons test.

Regarding RPE, A 2x120 way ANOVA was utilised to discover the main effect for self-talk,

condition as well as the interaction.

3. Results

Manipulation Checks

A paired sample t-test was conducted on the data collected from the manipulation

checks. We discovered that there was a significant difference in three different types of

questions one being the scores of the extent that self-talk reflected Interrogative Self-Talk

(M=7.5, SD=1.58) and Declarative Self-Talk (M=4.7, SD=1.57) during the Interrogative Self

talk condition (t (9) =3.096, p=0.13). Following this, a question asking what extent the self-


talk reflected interrogative self-talk (M=4.6, SD=2.17) and declarative self-talk (M=7.8,

SD=

1.39) during declarative self-talk time trials also revealed a significant difference (t (9) =-

4.311, p=.002). In question 5, participants had to record how useful they thought each type of

Self-Talk was during both conditions. Statements were created by participants independently

prior to each time trial. Results showed a significant difference between the perceived

usefulness of both interrogative (M = 7.5, SD= 1.37) and declarative self-talk cues (M =

7.5, SD =1.79) in their respective time trials, (t (9) = 2.449, p = .037) suggesting that

participants found Interrogative self-talk more useful. Regarding participants interest in the

task, the post-trial manipulation checks showed that interest in the Interrogative Self-talk (M

=6.7, SD = 2.6) trial was significantly lower than the interest in Declarative Self-Talk (M =

8.7, SD = 2.26) trial (t (9) = -3.354, p = .008).

Regarding insignificant results from the post-trial manipulation checks, the

differences in questions 1, 4, 6 and 8 did not reach a significant level. Question 1 asked

required participants to record to what extent they adhered to the instructions of the task

before and during each trial, results showed no significant difference ( t (9) = 1.172, p =.271).

Results showed no significant difference in question 4 that targeted the participants

motivation during both conditions (t (9) = 1.769, p= .111). Regarding participant’s

involvement and happiness, the paired sample t test did not show a significant difference

between both conditions regarding their involvement (t (9) = 1.0, p =.343) nor participants

happiness to work on the task (t (9) = -.502, p = .627). See appendix for full questionnaire.

Performance – Time trial Times.

Interrogative self-talk time trials did not overcome those of declarative self-talk,

Participants’ time trials did not support the aforementioned. When examined, Interrogative

Self-Talk (M = 1045.1, SD = 89.78) and Declarative Self-Talk (M = 1045.2, SD = 84.16) had


no significant difference in time trial completion times; (t (9) = -.11, p=.922). Figure 1 shows

clearly the non-significant differences between both conditions in time trials.

Rate of perceived exertion

Participants were 9 males and 1 female from Bangor University (M=21.4,

SD=1.43) .The original sample size for the study was 14 which then came down to 10 as 4

dropped out due to health issues as well as unavailability. I hypothesised that participants (n

=10) would benefit from the Interrogative Self-Talk cues which would result in a lower rate

of perceived exertion. We analysed both the mean RPE scores of each kilometre (1 to 10) for

Interrogative Self-Talk (IS-T) and the Declarative Self-Talk (DS-T) conditions with a 2 x 10

ANOVA. RPE increased linearly over the course of each TT, reaching a peak in (1 to 10) for

Interrogative Self-Talk (IS-T) and the Declarative Self-Talk (DS-T) conditions with a 2 x 10

ANOVA. RPE increased linearly over the course of each TT, reaching a peak in both groups

on completion of the tenth and final kilometre. The 2 x 10 ANOVA with Kilometres (1-10)

and Conditions (Interrogative Self-Talk and Declarative Self-Talk) as within-subject factors

INTERROGATIVE SELF TALK DECLARATVIE SELF TALK1045

1045.05

1045.1

1045.15

1045.2

1045.25

Self-Talk

Tim

e (s

ec)

Figure 1. Time trial completion times for both IS-T and DS-T in a 10km time trial on a watt

bike.


revealed a main effect of Kilometres, (F (9, 81) = 91.65, p < .001) but did not reveal a main

effect of Condition, (F (1, 9) = .00 p =.988). Furthermore, the interaction between Kilometres

and Condition did not reach a statistically significant level (F (9, 81) = .33, p =.962). RPE is

shown in Figure 2.

Power Output

A 2x10 repeated measure ANOVA was conducted on the power output data, with

within subject’s factor Condition (declarative, interrogative) and Distance (Km 1-2, 2-3 ... 9-

10). A Greenhouse-geisser correction was applied when Mauchy’s test of Sphericity

indicated a violation of the assumption. The analysis showed a non-significant main effect for

self-talk

(F (1, 9) = 0.337, p= .576), however, we observed a significant main effect of Distance (F (2,

28) = 7.57, p < .005). As well as this, the final comparison showed a nearly significant

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100.00001.00002.00003.00004.00005.00006.00007.00008.00009.0000

10.0000

Interrogative Self-Talk

Declarative Self-Talk

Distance (Km)

Mea

n R

PE

Figure.2 – The Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) in time trial (TT) 2 and TT3 in

Interrogative Self-Talk group (M=5.36, SD=2.37) and Declarative Self-Talk group

(M=5.36, SD=2.34) across 1km increments.


difference in the interaction between self-talk and distance (F (1, 9) = 3.814, p =.083).

However, based on our a priori hypothesis we decided to further explore the main effect of

Distance with single repeated measures ANOVA and multiple t-tests.

The repeated measures ANOVA on declarative self-talk revealed a significant simple

effect of Distance, (F (2, 20) = 4.1, p < .05) but no significant changes was shown by

Bonferroni multiple comparisons over each point. Notably, the repeated measures ANOVA

on declarative self-talk showed a significant simple effect of distance (F (2, 21) = 4.101, p

= .027) as well as a significant main effect of distance for interrogative self-talk (F (2, 20) =

7.72, p < .005). Bonferroni multiple comparisons, revealed a significant increases of power

output in the last kilometre (9 to 10) compared to the kilometre 5 to 6 (marginal significance

p = .063), 6 to 7 (p < .05), and 8 to 9 (p< .05). Furthermore, multiple t-tests contrasting the

two self-talk conditions in each kilometre revealed a significant difference in km 9-10 but

nowhere else, with larger power output for participants using interrogative self-talk (t (9) = -

2.33, p = 0.44).Power output data is shown in Figure 3.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10150.0000000000

160.0000000000

170.0000000000

180.0000000000

190.0000000000

200.0000000000

210.0000000000

220.0000000000

Declarativative self-talk

Interrogative self-talk

Distance (km)

Pow

er O

utpu

t (W

atts

)

Figure 3. The Power output in TT2 and TT3 for Interrogative Self-Talk (M= 173.3398,

SD=13.83) and Declarative Self-Talk (M=172.5754, SD= 12.04) across 1km increments.


4. Discussion

This study examined the effect of Interrogative self-talk and declarative self-talk on

performance, RPE and power output during a 10km time trial on a watt bike. The majority of

the results were not as predicted as there were no significant differences between time trial

times in both conditions. One possible reason over this is that the self-talk cues that were

given were powerful not enough, however, it could also be a result of numerous reasons such

as fatigue, psychological state, or the participant’s inability to use self-talk. Following this,

RPE also did not show a significant difference between both groups across all 10 kilometres,

however, looking at power output, a significant difference in the last kilometre suggests that

IS-T may be a beneficial intervention for power output towards the end of an endurance task.

The above finding confirms the findings of Atkinson, G., & Brunskill, A. (2000) which states

that events such as a fixed distance time trials will demonstrate an end spurt of power output

which exceeds any initial power production. Although there were no significant differences

in time trial times or RPE between both conditions, comparing both power output and the

RPE in the tenth kilometre for the IS-T condition proved to be relatively interesting. We

could assume that although power output increased significantly in the last kilometre for the

IS-T condition, participants did not perceive the task any easier using this type of self-

talk .One assumption that could be made from this is that IS-T may have encouraged the

participant to work harder in last kilometre but at the same time have no effect on how the

participants perceived the difficulty of the task. Earlier predictions derived from Barwood’s

et al (2015) study that RPE would decrease as a result of, in this case IS-T, have not been

supported by the data. As it was in Barwood’s findings, RPE increased linearly over both

conditions but had no significant differences between both sets of time trials (see Figure 1).

Knowing this therefore confirms the findings of Barwood et al (2015) which would lead to

the conclusion that further research needs to be carried out on how to lower RPE using IS-T.


Similar to Barwood’s study, power output mean across both conditions mirrored those

of completion times, however, results showed a peak power output for both groups at the end

of the time trial. As previously mentioned, RPE remained consistent across all kilometres

(see Figure 1) and completion times had no significant differences, therefore a significant

difference in the power out of the last kilometre, which mirrors Barwood’s findings, is

unusual to say the least. One possible assumption that could be made from this that

participants may have kept a mental count of the times that the experimenter had asked for

RPE therefore had knowledge of distance, and more importantly, being in the last kilometre.

By gaining this information, participants may have been motivated to give a ‘big last push’

towards the finish line, resulting in a higher power output at this point. A potential limitation

could be drawn from this as asking for RPE every kilometre gives away information of

distance to the participant which violates the conditions.

Regarding manipulation checks, a post cycle questionnaire was given to each

participant (see appendices) that asked a variety of questions concerning their emotions and

obedience during the task. Interestingly enough, results show a variety of differences that was

not expected. First of all, results suggested that participants were more interested in the task

while using DS-T than IS-T, however, there were no significant differences in how happy

participants were during both conditions. Referring back to the findings of Senay et al (2010)

that suggested participants had a stronger intention to exercise after using IS-T statements

such as ‘Will I?’ in an anagram solving task, a comparison could be made between his

findings on participants intentions, and the current study’s findings on participants perceived

usefulness of self-talk cues. Results from the current research suggest that participants found

the declarative from of self-talk to be more useful in terms of performing better. Comparing

both factors (intention vs usefulness), we could draw a conclusion that IS-T may be a

beneficial way of enhancing someone’s intentions after a task but DS-T may be perceived


more useful during a task. One possible explanation for this comes down to previously

known self-talk, participants may have been naturally self-talking in the declarative form for

years prior to the task therefore this type of self-talk may be stored in the long term memory,

yet again IS-T is also highly unlikely to be a form of self-talk that the participants would have

been using years prior to the task. Although this is a limitation, it would be almost impossible

to control without violating the participant’s rights, however, using another type of self-talk

instead of DS-T that’s as abnormal as IS-T on the participants may prove beneficial in terms

of limiting the effect of stored DS-T. One possible applied implication that could be drawn

from this principle is that IS-T may be a beneficial way of promoting health and could be

used within the health sector as a solution for some aspects of obesity. For instance; using IS-

T as an intervention on an overweight adult during a healthy eating scheme could promote

physical activity after the scheme. This is a topic for further research that could enhance the

understanding of the aforementioned point.

Regarding question 2 and 3 which asked about the participants used interrogative self-

talk the declarative condition and vice versa. Results show that participants followed the in

instructions of each condition fairly well as the self-talk assigned to each condition were used

appropriately. Knowing this, we can confirm that counterbalancing the order of conditions

had a beneficial outcome as participants reported no significant carry on effect. Although

previously mentioned that motivational intensity increases an individual’s attentional focus

during goal-directed task, the current study did not show any supportive evidence of this

theory. Referring back to Blanchard et al (2013) that states this theory, it is possible that

finishing the 10km in the fastest time, was not an appropriate goal to induce maximal

motivation.

Hypothetically, if the participants had a more rewarding goal such as a cash prize rather

than a general goal of simply finishing the 10km in the fastest time, the increase in


motivation towards the goal would have narrowed attentional focus resulting in better

performance (Hart. W., & Gable, P. A 2013). On the other hand, implementing cash prizes

would have been problematic in terms of controlling self-talk as participants self-talk could

have be drawn more towards the reward rather than finishing the 10km quickly. Knowing

this, we could assume that IS-T did not act as a motivator during the task as there were no

significant differences in how motivating participants saw each type of self-talk. Although

IS-T has shown little effect on motivation during the task, we could assume that coaches of

novice and elite athletes who struggle with increasing their athletes’ motivation would benefit

from knowing this, however, the current study had a limited amount of participants, and

therefore drawing such a broad implication would be rash without any further research. The

limitation that could be drawn from this is that participants were limited in terms of sources

of motivation. Although hypothetically, IST should increase one’s motivation, participants

did not have a highly rewarding goal to thrive towards, therefore motivation may have

suffered in terms of reaching its potential during the task.

This study is not without limitations. First of all, participants count did not have depth

in which more reliable data could have been found. As well as low participant count, an equal

mix of genders was not present therefore further comparisons of the effect of IS-T on

endurance performance regarding both genders was not possible. Consequently, the findings

reflect a small population of primarily males which call out for further research in this field.

In addition, less-skilled participants are more likely to respond to self-talk than skilled

participants (Tod, D., Hardy, J., & Oliver, E. 2011) therefore examining participants on a

skill that in fairly unfamiliar would have theoretically be beneficial. Furthermore, the lack of

information of participant’s fitness prior to task has also limited analysis. By gaining records

of Vo2 max prior to time trial 1, evaluation of pre and post Vo2 max scores would have been

beneficial in terms of seeing the effect of the intervention on this measure.


Overall, the above suggest that interrogative self-talk does not alter completion times,

RPE or power output for most of a 10 kilometre time trial, however a peak power output in

the last kilometre suggests Interrogative self-talk may be a beneficial psychological

intervention for novice cyclists in the final part of an endurance test

References.

Amann, M., Venturelli, M., Ives, S. J., McDaniel, J., Layec, G., Rossman, M. J., & Richardson,

R. S. (2013). Peripheral fatigue limits endurance exercise via a sensory feedback-mediated

reduction in spinal motor neuronal output. Journal of applied physiology, 115(3), 355-364.

Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, (2006). Instructional and Motivational self-talk: An investigation on

perceived self-talk functions. Hellenic Journal of

Psychology. 3 (2), pp.166-175

Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, Nikos Zourbanos, Evangelos Galanis, and Yiannis Theodorakis,

(2011). Self-Talk and Sports Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Perspectives on Psychological

Science. 6 (4), pp.348-356

Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, Yannis Theodorakis & Nikos Zourbanos, (2004). Self-Talk in the

Swimming Pool: The Effects of Self-Talk on Thought Content and Performance on Water-

Polo Tasks. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 16 (2), pp.138-150

Atkinson, G., & Brunskill, A. (2000). Pacing strategies during a cycling time trial with

simulated headwinds and tailwinds. Ergonomics, 43(10), 1449-1460.

Barwood, M. J., Corbett, J., White, D., & James, J. (2011). Early change in thermal perception is

not a driver of anticipatory exercise pacing in the heat. British journal of sports medicine,

bjsports-2011.


Barwood, M. J., Corbett, J., Wagstaff, C. R., McVeigh, D., & Thelwell, R. C. (2015).

Improvement of 10-km time-trial cycling with motivational self-talk compared with neutral

self-talk. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 10(2), 166-71.

Blanchfield A.W, Hardy J, De Morree HM, Staiano W, Marcora SM, (2014). Talking yourself

out of exhaustion: the effects of self-talk on endurance performance. Medical Science Sports

Exercise. e.g. 32 (5), pp.999-1008

Brehm, J. W., & Self, E. A. (1989). The intensity of motivation.

Dennis Landin & Edward P. Hebert, (1999). The influence of self-talk on the performance of

skilled female tennis players. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 11 (2), pp.263-282

Eddie Harmon-Jones, Philip A. Gable, and Tom F. Price, (2013). Does Negative Affect Always

Narrow and Positive Affect Always Broaden the Mind? Considering the Influence of

Motivational Intensity on Cognitive Scope. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 22

(4), pp.301-307

Morin, A. (2005). Possible links between self-awareness and inner speech theoretical

background, underlying mechanisms, and empirical evidence. Journal of Consciousness

Studies, 12(4-5), 115-134.

Ryan A. Hamilton, David Scott & Michael P. MacDougall, (2007). Assessing the Effectiveness

of Self-Talk Interventions on Endurance Performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology.

19 (2), pp.226-239

Schüler, J., & Langens, T. A. (2007). Psychological Crisis in a Marathon and the Buffering

Effects of Self‐Verbalizations1. Journal of applied social psychology, 37(10), 2319-2344.

Senay, I. (2010). Motivating Goal-Directed Behavior Through Introspective Self-Talk.

Psychological Science. 21 (e.g. 2), pp.499-504


Theodorakis, Y., Weinberg, R., Natsis, P., Douma, I., & Kazakas, P. (2000). The effects of

motivational versus instructional self-talk on improving motor performance. Sport

Psychologist, 14(3), 253-271.

Tod, D., Hardy, J., & Oliver, E. (2011). Effects of self-talk: A systematic review. Journal of

Sport and Exercise Psychology, 33(5), 666.

William Hart, Philip A. Gable, (2013). Motivating goal pursuit: The role of affect motivational

intensity and activated goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 49 (5), pp. 922–

926


Acknowledgements.

The author would like to thank James Hardy for clarification of thinking data analysis, Ross

Roberts for constructive feedback on data collecting, Eduardo Bellomo with guidance

on statistical analysis, Ian Lloyd-Jones for giving advice on the written structure and the

participants for their involvement.


Appendices

1. Consent Form


2. Health Form


3.i Weekly Engagment in Activity Form

3.ii


3.iii


4.i Forms to create IS-T and DS-T cues


4ii

4. iii

4. iv


4.v

4.vi

5. Rate of Perceived Exertion


6.i Manipulation Checks.


6.ii

does interrogative self ( started editing )

Documents