The Effect of Self-Talk on Dart Throwing Accuracy Assessment

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of self-talk valence (positive-negative) and perspective (internal or external) on dart-throwing performance. The participants, 350 undergraduate students, were asked to hit a dartboard bulls-eye in one of five randomly assigned conditions: internal positive, internal negative, external positive, external negative, and no self-talk. Results replicated previous findings, supporting the hypothesis that positive self-talk groups perform significantly better than negative self-talk groups. However, the hypothesis that internal self-talk groups would perform better than external self-talk groups was not supported. It was concluded that positive self-talk can enhance performance and assist skill acquisition, but further studies should examine the effect of internal and external self-talk across varied task, participant, self-talk, and intervention characteristics.

Introduction

Former World Number One tennis player Lleyton Hewitt is well known for his use of positive and negative self-talk, including both overt “C’mon!” motivational statements and instructional internal self-talk tactics to facilitate his sporting performance. Self-talk is what people say to themselves either out loud or internally to understand feelings or to direct thoughts (Hatzigeorgiadis, Theodorakis, & Zourbanos, 2004). It has been shown to be beneficial in areas such as anxiety and behavioral disorder treatment (Treadwell & Kendall, 1996; Callicott & Park, 2003), pain management (Sanders, Shepherd, Cleghorn, & Woolford, 1994), and sports performance (Hatzigeorgiadis, Zourbanos, Galanis, & Theodorakis, 2011).

Observing that different self-talk cues (‘I can do this’ or ‘ready’) had varied effects on different sports, Hardy (2006) redefined self-talk in sport as a multi-dimensional construct, encompassing motivational and instructional purposes. Theodorakis, Hatzigeorgiadis, and Chroni (2008) noted that while empirical evidence confirms a correlation between self-talk and sport performance, theoretical evidence for causal effects remains limited.

Meichenbaum’s (1977) self-instructional behavior modification theory addressed the mediating effects of self-statements on performance, suggesting that self-statements influence behavior by focusing attention, appraisal processes, and increasing performance capacity by warding off interrupting thoughts. Theodorakis et al. (2008) proposed five mechanisms through which self-talk facilitates performance: increased attentional focus, enhanced confidence, effort regulation, cognitive and emotional control, and automatic execution triggering.

Hatzigeorgiadis et al. (2011) conducted a meta-analysis identifying key moderating mechanisms for performance enhancement, including task, participant, self-talk, and intervention characteristics. Positive self-talk was generally more effective, especially for fine motor skills, novel tasks, and tasks involving training. However, limitations include the exclusion of negative self-talk and lack of analysis on internal versus external self-talk effects.

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of self-talk valence (positive-negative) and perspective (internal-external) on dart-throwing performance. A novel dart-throwing task was administered to novice players, and participants were randomly assigned to one of five conditions: internal positive, internal negative, external positive, external negative, and no self-talk.

Method

Participants

A total of 350 undergraduate students from the University of Western Sydney participated. They were randomly allocated to one of five experimental conditions:

1. Internal positive self-talk (n = 62)

2. Internal negative self-talk (n = 70)

3. External positive self-talk (n = 72)

4. External negative self-talk (n = 84)

5. Neutral self-talk (n = 62)

Two participants with frequent dart-playing experience were excluded, leaving 348 participants. Those who did not comply with the assigned self-talk condition were also excluded, resulting in 340 participants (249 females, 91 males).

Materials and Apparatus

• Regulation dartboard (35.5 cm diameter)

• Distance from target line: 210 cm; height: 183 cm

• Six darts per participant

• Maximum distance from bullseye for misses: 17.75 cm

• Post-experimental questionnaire for manipulation check

Procedure

Participants were tested in class groups (15–26 per group) and randomly assigned to one of five conditions. Each participant performed three practice throws followed by three experimental throws.

• Internal Positive Self-Talk: “I can do it” (silent)

• Internal Negative Self-Talk: “I can’t do it” (silent)

• External Positive Self-Talk: “I can do it” (aloud)

• External Negative Self-Talk: “I can’t do it” (aloud)

• Control Group: No self-talk instructions

After the task, participants completed the post-throw questionnaire.

Results

Dart throwing accuracy (cm from bullseye) was analyzed using a one-way ANOVA. Assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance were met. Results were significant, F(4, 335) = 36.5, p = .01.

• Positive self-talk conditions (internal/external) performed significantly better than the control group.

• Negative self-talk conditions performed worse than the control group.

• No significant differences were observed between internal and external perspectives.

Discussion

The study replicates previous findings (Van Raalte et al., 1995; Cumming et al., 2006) that positive self-talk improves performance compared to negative self-talk. However, internal versus external self-talk did not show significant differences, contradicting Theodorakis et al.’s (2008) hypothesis that overt self-talk is distracting.

Limitations include:

• Only novice participants were tested; results may differ for experienced athletes.

• The task involved fine motor skills; gross motor or endurance tasks may produce different results.

• Small number of practice and experimental throws may limit generalizability.

This study contributes to the self-talk literature by confirming performance benefits of positive self-talk and exploring the unexamined internal versus external perspectives. It reinforces the use of self-talk as a practical strategy for skill acquisition and performance enhancement in sports.

Summary of Assessment Requirements

The Applied Communication Techniques (APCT5121) assessment required students to submit a structured research report examining a psychological or behavioural phenomenon. The key requirements included:

1. Research Focus: Select a relevant topic and clearly define the aim and hypothesis. In this case, the effect of self-talk (positive/negative, internal/external) on dart-throwing accuracy.

2. Literature Review: Critically evaluate relevant literature to identify gaps, theoretical frameworks, and prior empirical findings.

3. Methodology: Design a study including participants, materials, apparatus, and procedural steps to test the hypotheses.

4. Data Collection & Analysis: Collect experimental data, apply statistical analyses (e.g., ANOVA), and interpret results in context.

5. Discussion: Compare findings to literature, acknowledge limitations, and suggest implications for theory and practice.

6. Academic Conventions: Apply correct referencing (APA/Harvard), formal academic writing, proper formatting, and clear presentation of tables and appendices.

Key pointers to be covered: aim, hypothesis, participant selection, self-talk conditions, dart-throwing procedure, data analysis, results interpretation, limitations, contribution to knowledge, and referencing.

Guidance by Academic Mentor

The academic mentor guided the student through each phase of the assignment:

1. Topic Selection & Hypothesis Formation:

   • Mentor helped the student select a topic with both theoretical and practical relevance.

   • Discussed the importance of testing self-talk valence and perspective on a fine motor task.

   • Student drafted hypotheses based on prior studies and theoretical frameworks.

2. Literature Review & Theoretical Framework:

   • Mentor suggested sources on self-talk in sports and cognitive-behavioural theories (e.g., Meichenbaum, Theodorakis).

   • Student compiled studies, critically evaluating research gaps such as internal vs external self-talk.

3. Methodology Design:

   • Mentor advised on participant recruitment, random assignment, and experimental conditions.

   • Student prepared clear procedural instructions, practice and experimental throws, and a post-task questionnaire.

4. Data Collection & Statistical Analysis:

   • Mentor assisted with structuring ANOVA analysis for dart-throw accuracy data.

   • Student organized data, calculated means and standard deviations, and interpreted statistical significance.

5. Results Interpretation & Discussion:

   • Mentor emphasized comparing outcomes to previous research, discussing positive vs negative self-talk effects, and exploring practical implications.

   • Student wrote a discussion highlighting performance gains, lack of internal/external differences, limitations, and future research directions.

6. Finalization & Academic Standards:

   • Mentor reviewed formatting, references, table presentation, and appendices.

   • Student finalized the report ensuring APA referencing, clear abstract, structured headings, and coherent academic writing.

Outcome and Learning Objectives Achieved

• Outcome:

  • The student produced a well-structured, research-informed report demonstrating an understanding of self-talk effects on fine motor performance.

  • The study replicated previous findings and contributed to knowledge on internal vs external self-talk perspectives.

• Learning Objectives Covered:

  1. Develop critical literature evaluation and synthesis skills.

  2. Apply psychological theory to experimental design and performance assessment.

  3. Collect, analyze, and interpret quantitative data.

  4. Communicate research findings clearly in formal academic style.

  5. Demonstrate correct referencing, ethical consideration, and professional reporting.

Final Remark: The report met all assessment requirements, including a clear research aim, structured methodology, accurate data analysis, critical discussion, and adherence to academic conventions.

Access High-Quality Assignment Solutions Today

Looking to understand how a top-grade assignment is structured? Download our sample solution to see professional research, analysis, and formatting in action. This sample is designed to guide your learning and improve your understanding but remember, it’s for reference only. Submitting it as your own work is considered plagiarism and may have serious academic consequences.

If you want a completely original, plagiarism-free assignment, our team of experienced academic writers is ready to create a custom solution tailored to your requirements. Ordering a fresh assignment ensures you:

• Receive a unique, expertly written solution every time

• Save valuable study time and reduce stress

• Improve your grades with content aligned to your academic level and instructions

• Get proper formatting, citations, and references as per your style guide

Don’t risk your academic integrity take control of your studies with professional support.

Choose Your Option:

[Download Sample Solution] [Order Fresh Assignment]