{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021704180064308683, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.114285714285714, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exploring a modified conceptualization of imagery direction and golf putting performance

Abstract This study investigated a modified conceptualization of imagery direction and its subsequent effects on golf putting performance. A progression in the directional imagery literature was made by eliminating the need for participants to intentionally create persuasively harmful images as they rarely occur, if at all, in the sporting domain. Thus, we explored a more ecologically valid conceptualization of debilitative imagery and measured the effects on sports performance (golf putting). Seventy five participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions: (a) facilitative imagery, (b) suppressive imagery (debilitative), or (c) no‐imagery control. After performing imagery, the facilitative imagery group successfully putted significantly more golf balls than the suppressive imagery group. This finding suggests that a non‐persuasive conceptualization of debilitative imagery can result in disparate effects on performance compared to facilitative imagery. In doing so, this adds ecological strength to the imagery direction literature by suggesting debilitative imagery need not be persuasive to influence motor skill performance.