Journal of Sports Sciences, December 2008; 26(14): 15391546

Playing with condence: The relationship between imagery use and self-condence and self-efcacy in youth soccer players

KRISTA MUNROE-CHANDLER1, CRAIG HALL2, & GRAHAM FISHBURNE3

Department of Kinesiology, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, 2School of Kinesiology, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, and 3Department of Elementary Education, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (Accepted 1 July 2008)
1

Abstract Condence has been one of the most consistent factors in distinguishing the successful from the unsuccessful athletes (Gould, Weiss, & Weinberg, 1981) and Bandura (1997) proposed that imagery is one way to enhance condence. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between imagery use and condence in soccer (football) players. The participants included 122 male and female soccer athletes ages 1114 years participating in both house/ recreation (n 72) and travel/competitive (n 50) levels. Athletes completed three questionnaires; one measuring the frequency of imagery use, one assessing generalised self-condence, and one assessing self-efcacy in soccer. A series of regression analyses found that Motivational General-Mastery (MG-M) imagery was a signifant predictor of self-condence and self-efcacy in both recreational and competitive youth soccer players. More specically, MG-M imagery accounted for between 40 and 57% of the variance for both self-condence and self-efcacy with two other functions (MG-A and MS) contributing marginally in the self-condence regression for recreational athletes. These ndings suggest that if a youth athlete, regardless of competitive level, wants to increase his/her self-condence or self-efcacy through the use of imagery, the MG-M function should be emphasised.

Keywords: Condence, imagery, youth athletes, soccer

Introduction Imagery is dened as an experience that mimics real experiences. It differs from dreams in that we are awake and conscious when we form an image (White & Hardy, 1998, p. 389). Imagery has been a well-researched topic with adult athletes, especially elite ones (Hall, 2001), and previous sport literature has established that athletes can benet from using imagery in sport to enhance performance (Morris, Spittle, & Watt, 2005). Despite the fact that the majority of sport imagery research has been conducted with adults, there have been a number of studies that have examined youth athletes. Recent qualitative research conducted by MunroeChandler, Hall, Fishburne, and Strachan (2007) and Munroe-Chandler, Hall, Fishburne, O, and Hall (2007) have demonstrated that young athletes of 7 14 years report using imagery and that developmental differences do exist. More specically, athletes of from all age cohorts reported using

imagery for both cognitive and motivational purposes. However, younger athletes used imagery related to individual goals, whereas older athletes used imagery related to team goals. Additionally, the 1114-year-old athletes reported using imagery more than their younger counterparts (710 years). Athletes use of imagery has been widely researched from both a theoretical and applied perspective (Hall, 2001; Martin, Moritz, & Hall, 1999; Munroe, Giacobbi, Hall, & Weinberg, 2000; Nordin & Cumming, 2005; Paivio, 1985). Imagery research in the sport domain has been guided by Paivios analytic framework in which he posited that imagery has both cognitive and motivational functions that operate on either a specic or a general level. Thus, the cognitive general (CG) function entails imaging strategies, game plans or routines (e.g. a two on one in soccer), whereas the cognitive specic (CS) function involves imaging specic sport skills (e.g. taking a free kick). The motivational general (MG) function of imagery includes imaging

Correspondence: Krista Munroe-Chandler, Department of Kinesiology, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, Ontario, N9B 3P4 Canada. E-mail: chandler@uwindsor.ca ISSN 0264-0414 print/ISSN 1466-447X online 2008 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/02640410802315419

1540

K. Munroe-Chandler et al. nine sources of self-condence that would be practically organised into three broad domains; achievement, self-regulation and climate. Given there are differences in the sources of self-condence and self-efcacy, it is important to examine both constructs in order to obtain a complete picture as to how these constructs relate to imagery. Condence has been one of the most consistent factors in distinguishing successful from nonsuccessful athletes (Gould, Weiss, & Weinberg, 1981) and Bandura (1997) proposed that imagery is one way to enhance self-condence and selfefcacy. Therefore, it is no surprise the relationship between imagery and condence has been studied. Research specically examining MG-M imagery supports Banduras (1997) proposal. For example, Callow, Hardy, and Hall (2001) examined the effects of MG-M imagery on the condence of elite adult badminton players. The results showed that a 20week imagery intervention improved the sport condence for two of the players and stabilised the sport condence of the third player. Mills, Munroe, and Hall (2001) examined imagery use and a specic form of self-condence, namely self-efcacy in adult individual sport athletes. Results revealed that athletes who were high in self-efcacy in competition situations tended to use more MG-M imagery than their low self-efcacy counterparts. Vadocz, Hall, and Moritz (1997) investigated the relationships between imagery use and anxiety and self-condence in elite roller skaters between the ages of 12 and 18 years (Mage 15.39). It was found that motivational imagery use was related to both competitive state anxiety and self-condence, and more specic to the present discussion athletes who used more MG-M imagery were more condent. Using the same sample of athletes as Vadocz et al. (1997) but a different measure of condence, Moritz, Hall, Martin, and Vadocz (1996) also demonstrated that high-sport condent athletes use more MG-M imagery than those athletes having lower sport condence. They suggested that athletes should use MG-M imagery if they wish to develop, maintain, or reclaim their sport condence. The results of Moritz et al.s (1996) study suggest that when it comes to sport condence, the imaged rehearsal of specic sport skills may not be as important as the imagery of sport-related mastery experiences, which is in line with Martin et al.s (1999) Applied Model of Imagery. Although there seems to be considerable evidence that the use of MG-M imagery is associated with increased self-condence and self-efcacy, the research has been conducted with relatively elite athletes who are adolescents or adults. Does this relationship hold for recreational athletes and younger athletes? This question warrants examination since

physiological arousal levels and emotions (e.g. getting psyched up before a game); and the motivational specic (MS) function of imagery includes imaging individual goals (e.g. standing on the podium). This conceptual framework has since been amended, with the MG function of imagery divided into two lower-order functions: motivational-general arousal (MG-A) imagery, which comprises images surrounding affect regulation (e.g. remaining calm in front of a large crowd); and Motivational-General Mastery (MG-M) imagery, consisting of images related to mastery, self-condence and mental toughness (e.g. being able to overcome adversity) (Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998). Using the ve functions of imagery as their key component, Martin et al. (1999) developed an Applied Model of Imagery as a means to guide future research in the area. As the model suggests, the type (or function) of imagery use inuences the cognitive, affective and behavioural outcomes and these relationships are moderated by imagery ability. The model outlines two important sport-related cognitions that may be affected by imagery use; namely, self-condence and self-efcacy. Martin et al. argued that although imagery can serve multiple functions (e.g. rehearsing skills and strategies, regulating arousal and anxiety), the function of imagery employed should match the intended outcome. That is, if an athlete is interested in increasing self-condence or self-efcacy, MG-M should be the function of imagery implemented given it is most relevant for increasing, maintaining or regaining condence. In sport, there are two main approaches to the study of condence; self-condence and selfefcacy. Self-condence, which is a general term and most often measured as trait sport condence, refers to an athletes certainty about his or her ability to be successful in sport (Vealey, 1986). Self-efcacy, on the other hand, refers to ones belief that he or she can be successful in specic tasks, skills or under specic conditions (Bandura, 1986). For example, a soccer athlete may indicate she is condent she can play soccer well (i.e. trait sport condence) but feel less efcacious about her ability to remain in control when in a challenging soccer situation (i.e. selfefcacy). Most of the sport research on the sources of condence has followed Banduras (1986) selfefcacy theory. Research has supported the four sources of self-efcacy proposed by Bandura; namely, performance accomplishments (mastery), vicarious learning (e.g. imagery), verbal persuasion and physiological states. More recently, however, Vealey, Hayashi, Garner-Holman, and Giacobbi (1998) argued whether those sources identied by Bandura were salient to athletes within a sport context. Through a series of studies they determined

Imagery use and condence it has been shown that higher skilled athletes employ more imagery than lower skilled ones (Hall, 2001; Gregg & Hall, 2006). In addition, athletes 714 years of age report using all functions of imagery including MG-M, but unlike older athletes (Munroe, Hall, Simms, & Weinberg, 1998) they do not report using the MG-M function of imagery more than the MS function (Hall, Munroe-Chandler, Fishburne, & Hall, in press). Consequently, the purpose of the present study was to examine the relationships between imagery use and self-condence and self-efcacy in soccer players aged 1114 years competing at both the recreation and competitive levels. Because self-condence and self-efcacy are different concepts and are assessed in separate ways, both were included to provide a more complete investigation of different levels of condence-related constructs. It was hypothesised that MG-M imagery would be a signicant predictor of both self-condence and self-efcacy in young athletes; however, no specic hypotheses for the strength of the relationship between MG-M imagery use and self-condence versus MG-M imagery and self-efcacy were made because no prior research has examined both of these variables with imagery use in children. It was also hypothesised that the relationship between MG-M imagery use and selfcondence and self-efcacy would be stronger in competitive athletes than recreational athletes because self-condence and self-efcacy are important to success in competitive sport (Gould et al., 1981). The sport of soccer was targeted because it has two clearly dened levels, house league (i.e. non-elite) and travel (i.e. elite), and is equally represented by both males and females (Canadian Soccer Association). Soccer is the largest youth participation sport in Canada with over 702,000 youths (under 18 years old) registered in 2004 (Canadian Soccer Association).

1541

games against opposing leagues as well as teams within their own league and compete in tournament play to determine a league winner. Three participants did not report their level and as such were removed from any further analysis resulting in a total sample of 122 athletes. Measures Imagery use. The Sport Imagery Questionnaire for Children (SIQ-C; Hall et al., in press) stems from the SIQ (Hall et al., 1998), which was developed for adults to assess the motivational and cognitive functions of imagery proposed by Paivios (1985) analytic framework of imagery effects. It is a 21-item questionnaire with statements measuring the frequency of childrens imagery use. Statements were scored from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often) and participants were asked to circle the number that most applies to that particular statement. Any statement that explains an imagery situation that the child often uses should have been given a high number. Each of the ve functions of imagery was assessed throughout the 21 items. For example, the statement; I can usually control how a skill looks in my head addressed the CS function of imagery and the statement; I make up new game plans or routines in my head addressed CG imagery. The statement; I see myself being mentally strong assessed MG-M imagery and the statement; In my head, I imagine how calm I feel before I compete addressed the MG-A imagery function. Finally, the statement; I see myself doing my very best addressed MS imagery. The alpha reliabilities on each of the subscales are between 0.66 and 0.7 for all imagery functions (Hall et al., in press). Condence. The Competitive State Anxiety Inventory 2 for Children (CSAI-2C; Stadulis, MacCraken, Edison, & Severance, 2002) is a 15item questionnaire that measures somatic and cognitive anxiety as well as condence. Given the current study is only interested in the condence subscale, the anxiety subscales were not employed. The condence subscale consists of ve items that are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much so). Cronbachs alpha for the condence subscale has been adequate at 0.73 (Stadulis et al., 2002). The current study was concerned with the athletes trait measure of condence (i.e. trait sport condence) and as such, slight modications were made to the items of the CSAI-2C in order to make it trait specic. For example, I feel self-condent was modied to read I usually feel self-condent. For the purpose of the current study, the modied questionnaire has been termed, the Competitive Trait Anxiety Inventory 2 for Children (CTAI-2C).

Method Participants A sample of young athletes were recruited from house and travel soccer leagues from Southwestern Ontario. The participants included 125 male (n 56) and female (n 69) soccer athletes with ages 1114 years. The total sample of athletes reported a mean of 6.11 (s 2.86) years of soccer playing experience. The participants competed in both house/recreation (n 72) and travel/competitive (n 50) levels. The focus of recreational soccer is on skill development, and although recreational athletes do not have a tournament at the end of season to determine a league winner, they do partake in game play against other teams within their league. Competitive level athletes, on the other hand, play

1542

K. Munroe-Chandler et al.
Table I. Means and standard deviations for demographic information and questionnaire scores. Combined sample Mean 6.11 3.49 3.30 3.69 3.91 3.73 3.58 82.19 s 2.86 0.92 0.81 0.91 0.69 0.81 0.53 13.05

Self-efcacy. The Self-efcacy Questionnaire for Soccer (SEQ-S) was employed as an additional measure of condence. Although the condence scale of the CSAI-2C is a general measure, the SEQ-S is specic to assessing the perceived selfefcacy of athletes in soccer competition. It is a 5-item instrument and is a modication of a questionnaire employed by Mills et al. (2001), in which they assessed self-efcacy in both practice and competition settings, and Munroe-Chandler and Hall (2005), in which they assessed the collective efcacy of a young soccer team. The questionnaire asks participants to record the strength of their belief in their mental abilities (e.g. focussed, in control, mentally tough) based on a 100-point scale, ranging in 10-unit intervals from 0 (No Condence) to 100 (Complete Condence). The ve items are as follows: I am condent I can work through difcult situations; I am condent I can remain focussed during a challenging situation; I am condent I can be mentally tough throughout a competition; I am condent I can remain in control in challenging situations; I am condent I can appear condent in front of others. Procedures Upon receiving ethics clearance from the universitys research ethics boards, contact was made to the soccer teams from the researchers through email and mailed letters to the coach. In addition, parental consent and player assent were obtained. The players rst were asked to complete a general demographics questionnaire including their age, gender, level and number of years playing soccer. Next, the participants completed the three questionnaires in the following order; the SIQ-C to assess their frequency of imagery use, the CTAI-2C to measure their generalised condence, and nally the SEQ-S to assess their self-efcacy in soccer. Completion of the questionnaires took *15 min and were completed prior to the athletes practice at their respective practice elds. Data were collected mid-soccer season over the course of a 2-week period.

Competitive Variable Mean s

Recreational Mean 6.11 3.48 3.27 3.66 3.95 3.73 3.60 82.65 s 2.81 1.04 0.78 1.02 0.73 0.85 0.57 11.52

Years playing 6.10 2.98 SIQ-C (5 point scale) CS 3.51 0.73 CG 3.34 0.87 MS 3.73 0.73 MGM 3.85 0.64 MGA 3.72 0.75 CTAI-2C (4 point scale) 3.53 0.48 SEQ-S (100% scale) 81.56 15.01

condence, or self-efcacy) or the number of years playing. Internal consistencies were found to be acceptable for all subscales with alphas ranging from 0.68 to 0.83 (CS 0.83, CG 0.73, MS 0.68, MG-A 0.69, MG-M 0. 79). However, removal of item 2 (I see myself doing my very best) improved the internal consistency of the MS subscale to 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). As such, the remainder of the analyses was run with the revised MS subscale. In addition, the SEQ-S and CTAI-2C both had adequate alphas of 0.86 and 0.82, respectively. To make comparisons between scores on imagery frequency (SIQ-C) and condence (CTAI-2C) and self-efcacy (SEQ-S), Pearson correlations were calculated (see Table II). Although all the correlations between the imagery subscales and the two condence measures were positive and signicant and ranged from moderate to strong, as expected the MG-M subscale of the SIQ-C was most strongly correlated with SEQ-S and CTAI-2C. Moreover, the two measures of condence, SEQ-S and CTAI-2C, were signicantly correlated. Primary analyses To examine the relationship between imagery use and self-condence and self-efcacy in athletes, a series of regressions were run. Separate analyses were run for the recreational and competitive groups. MG-M was entered rst in the regressions because this function of imagery is the most similar to sport relevant tasks that represent condence and self-efcacy and therefore this should account for the most variance. All other imagery subscales of imagery were blocked and entered in the second step to determine if these functions of imagery added to the signicant prediction of self-condence and efcacy. The results are reported in Tables III and IV for the self-condence and self-efcacy regressions, respectively.

Results Preliminary results Table I presents the means and standard deviations of the demographic variables as well as the scores for the SEQ-S, CTAI-2C, and the ve subscales of the SIQ-C. No signicant differences were found between level of play (competitive and recreational) or gender (male and females) with respect to any of the dependent variables (ve imagery functions, self-

Imagery use and condence

Table II. Correlations for imagery, self-condence and self-efcacy. CS CS CG MS MGA MGM Condence Self-efcacy 1.00 0.45** 0.46** 0.43** 0.53** 0.38** 0.31** CG MS MGA MGM Condence

1543

Self-efcacy

1.00 0.41** 0.37** 0.52** 0.42** 0.41**

1.00 0.50** 0.54** 0.53** 0.39**

1.00 0.58** 0.52** 0.43**

1.00 0.64** 0.66**

1.00 0.64**

1.00

Note: **Correlation is signicant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table III. Summary of regression analyses for imagery variables signicantly predicting self-condence. Model Variable B SE B b t

CTAI-2C (recreational) Model 1 MG-M Model 2 MG-M CS CG MG-A MS CTAI-2C (competitive) Model 1 MG-M Model 2 MG-M CS CG MG-A MS

0.56 0.16 0.05 0.88 0.21 0.13 0.48 0.31 70.05 0.05 0.14 0.10

0.07 0.11 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.10

0.71 0.20 0.10 0.12 0.31 0.23 0.63 0.41 70.07 0.10 0.21 0.16

8.34** 1.46 0.94 1.18 2.78** 2.11* 5.55** 2.64* 70.55 0.67 1.53 1.07

Note: B, unstandardised beta (regression) coefcient; SE B, standard error of B; b, standardised beta (regression) coefcient; t, t-statistic. *P 5 0.05; **P 5 0.01.

CTAI-2C. The results of the hierarchical multiple regression model predicting self-condence are presented in Table III. The results for the recreational group revealed that the overall regression for self-condence (CTAI-2C) was signicant (F (5, 64) 22.01, P 5 0.001). MG-M accounted for 50.6% of the total variance. Moreover, MG-A and MS signicantly accounted for an additional 12.7%. Inspection of the beta weight for these variables indicted that the use of MG-M (b 0.71, P 5 0.01), MG-A (b 0.31, P 5 0.01), and MS (b 0.23, P 5 0.05) were positively related to self-condence. The results for the competitive group revealed that the overall regression for self-condence was signicant (F (5, 43) 7.28, P 5 0.001). MG-M, which was the only signicant predictor, accounted for 39.6% of the total variance. Inspection of the beta weight for this variable indicted that the use of MG-M was positively related to self-condence (b 0.41, P 5 0.01) with the remaining imagery functions accounting for an additional 6.3% of the variance. SEQ-S. The results of the hierarchical multiple regression model predicting self-efcacy are presented in Table IV. For the recreational group, the overall regression for the self-efcacy (SEQ-S) was signicant (F (5, 61) 15.17, P 5 0.001). MG-M was the only signicant predictor accounting for 51.6% of the variance. Inspection of the beta weight for this variable indicted that the use of MG-M was positively related to self-efcacy (b 0.72, P 5 0.01). With respect to the competitive group, the overall regression for the self-efcacy was signicant (F (5, 43) 14.51, P 5 0.001). MG-M was the only signicantly predictor accounting for 57% of the variance. Inspection of the beta weight for this variable indicted that the use of MG-M was positively related to self-efcacy (b 0.76, P 5 0.01). Discussion Previous research has consistently shown a positive relationship between MG-M imagery use and

Table IV. Summary of regression analyses for imagery variables signicantly predicting self-efcacy. Variable Variable B SE B b t

SE-S (recreational) Model 1 MG-M Model 2 MG-M CS CG MG-A MS SE-S (competitive) Model 1 MG-M Model 2 MG-M CS CG MG-A MS

11.93 8.52 70.38 0.94 2.76 1.49 17.69 14.78 1.63 4.12 2.66 73.21

1.43 2.45 1.30 1.69 1.76 1.46 2.24 3.02 2.27 2.03 2.36 2.47

0.72 0.51 70.04 0.06 0.19 0.12 0.76 0.63 0.08 0.23 0.13 70.16

8.33** 3.48** 3.48 0.56 1.57 1.02 7.89** 4.89** 0.72 1.97 1.13 71.3

Note: B, unstandardised beta (regression) coefcient; SE B, standard error of B; b, standardised beta (regression) coefcient; t, t-statistic. **P 5 0.01.

1544

K. Munroe-Chandler et al. increase their condence. In contrast, competitive level players do not need to use MS imagery to boost their condence as they have more mastery experiences (e.g. games, tournaments). Despite the small added contribution of MG-A and MS to the regression, the results of the present study along with previous research provides convincing evidence that MG-M imagery interventions will be the most benecial function of imagery to employ in order to increase self-condence and self-efcacy. Previous research conducted by Munroe-Chandler and Hall (2005) provide procedural information and imagery scripts that could assist coaches in developing an MG-M imagery intervention with soccer athletes. The current study also hypothesised that the relationship between MG-M imagery use and selfcondence and self-efcacy would be stronger in competitive athletes than recreational athletes because both self-condence and self-efcacy are important to success in competitive sport (Beauchamp et al., 2002; Gould et al., 1981). This failed to be the case. In fact, for recreational athletes, MG-M imagery use explained a greater amount of variance in self-condence than it did for competitive level athletes. This nding may be supported by Banduras (1997) self-efcacy theory. As indicated earlier, recreational athletes have less chance to experience competition and therefore they must rely more on vicarious experiences (e.g. imagery) to further their self-efcacy beliefs. Contrastingly, competitive athletes may rely more on mastery experience as the primary contributor to their self-efcacy beliefs due to their many opportunities for competetion. Moreover, research has suggested that self-condence is critical to an athletes development (Vealey, 2001), and this should be true regardless of competitive level. Childrens perceptions of themselves or how good they feel about themselves are related to their performance, behaviour and health. As such, both competitive and recreational level athletes would see the benets of employing MG-M imagery as a means to increase their positive affect while participating in their chosen sport. The present ndings support Martin et al.s (1999) Applied Model of Imagery Use. Martin et al. (1999) argue that it is important to match the function of imagery use (MG-M) with the intended outcome (self-condence or self-efcacy) and our results support this argument. In addition, they have encouraged others to build and modify the model as our understanding of variables affecting athletes use of imagery emerges. With respect to the relationship examined in this study (i.e. MG-M imagery and self-condence and self-efcacy), competitive level has no inuence. Whether competitive level inuences the relationship between other imagery

self-condence and self-efcacy in elite adolescent and adult athletes (Callow & Hardy, 2001; Mills et al., 2001; Vadocz et al., 1997). The purpose of the present study was to examine if this relationship was evident in younger athletes aged 1114 years competing at both the recreation and competitive levels. As was hypothesised, MG-M imagery proved to be a signicant predictor of self-condence and self-efcacy in young soccer players. More specically, MG-M imagery accounted for between 40 and 57% of the variance for both self-condence and selfefcacy with MG-A and MS only adding marginally to the prediction of self-condence in recreational athletes. These ndings suggest that if an athlete wants to increase his/her self-condence or selfefcacy through the use of imagery, the MG-M function should be emphasised. Research (Beauchamp, Bray, & Albinson, 2002) has shown that athletes use more MG-M imagery than the other functions of imagery just prior to competition and that MG-M imagery predicts both self-efcacy and performance. It is possible that the other functions of imagery may increase the athletes self-condence and self-efcacy (Abma, Fry, Li, & Relyea, 2002; Short, Monsma, & Short, 2004), and in fact the current results indicate that MG-A and MS imagery contributed somewhat to the prediction of self-condence in recreational athletes. Recreational athletes may use MG-A imagery to picture themselves performing well under specic stressful circumstances (e.g. defending a free kick), which in turn may increase their self-efcacy. Given these athletes are at the recreational level, their skills may not be advanced and as such, they may have some anxiety with executing those sport skills. By imagining being calm and in control, an athletes condence may be enhanced. In addition to MG-A imagery being used by athletes as a means to reduce anxiety, Munroe et al. (2000) indicated this function of imagery can also be used as a means to get psyched up prior to performing. Because the focus of recreational soccer is skill development rather than becoming league champions, those athletes may use MG-A imagery as a motivator. That is, recreational athletes may use imagery to get themselves psyched up for playing which will then impact their self-efcacy and overall sport condence levels. MS imagery was also found to be a signcant predictor of self-condence in recreational athletes, albeit weak. One explanation for this nding is that recreational level players do not have the same opportunities to experience being successful as competitive players (e.g. they play few competitions and have no championship play) and, therefore, nd imaging situations such as being a champion and having an audience cheeer for them as a way to

Imagery use and condence functions and their intended outcomes, as outlined in the model, requires further research. The current study is not without limitations. The study is correlational in nature and therefore we are unable to determine cause and effect. Additionally, only athletes between the ages of 11 and 14 years were included in the present study. Given MunroeChandler et al. (2007) have shown that athletes as young as 7 years of age use all ve functions of imagery, it would be fruitful to examine the relationship between imagery use and self-condence and self-efcacy in younger athletes ages 710 years. They have also shown there are developmental differences with respect to athletes use of imagery. Because of the fact the current research only examined athletes participating in the sport of soccer; it would be benecial to examine this relationship in other sports, thereby increasing the generalisability of the ndings. Given the current research and previous ndings it would seem worthwhile to conduct MG-M interventions with younger athletes such as those that have been conducted with elite adults (Callow et al., 2001). The only MG-M intervention study conducted with young athletes was undertaken by Munroe-Chandler and Hall (2005). In this study they examined the impact of MG-M imagery on a young soccer teams collective efcacy but no research has examined a similar intervention on individual athletes self-condence or self-efcacy. Such an intervention could be conducted with players at any competitive level and be expected to show a positive result. From an applied perspective, the current ndings would support coaches and teachers encouragement of imagery use, especially MG-M imagery. Encouraging young athletes to use more MG-M imagery is one very important avenue for enhancing their self-condence and self-efcacy. Acknowledgement This research was supported by an SSHRC grant awarded to all the three authors. References
Abma, C., Fry, M., Li, Y., & Relyea, G. (2002). Differences in imagery content and imagery ability between high and low condent track and eld athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 6775. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efcacy. The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman. Beauchamp, M. R., Bray, S. R., & Albinson, J. G. (2002). Precompetition imagery, self-efcacy and performance in collegiate golfers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 697705. Callow, N., & Hardy, L. (2001). Types of imagery associated with sport condence in netball players of varying skill levels. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 117.

1545

Callow, N., Hardy, L., & Hall, C. (2001). The effects of a motivational general-mastery imagery intervention on the sport condence of high-level badminton players. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72, 389400. Canadian Soccer Association (n.d.). 2004 Soccer demographics. Retrieved 6 September 2005, from: http://www.canadasoccer. com Gould, D., Weiss, M., & Weinberg, R. (1981). Psychological characteristics of successful and non-successful Big Ten wrestlers. Journal of Sport Psychology, 3, 6981. Gregg, M., & Hall, C. (2006). The relationship of skill level and age to the use of imagery by golfers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 18, 353375. Hall, C. R. (2001). Imagery in sport and exercise. In R. N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas, & C. M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 529549). New York: Wiley. Hall, C. R., Mack, D., Paivio, A., & Hausenblas, H. A. (1998). Imagery use by athletes: development of the sport imagery questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 29, 7389. Hall, C. R., Munroe-Chandler, K. J., Fishburne, G., & Hall, N. D. (in press). The sport imagery questionnaire for children (SIQ). Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. Martin, K. A., Moritz, S. E., & Hall, C. R. (1999). Imagery use in sport: a literature review and applied model. The Sport Psychologist, 13, 245268. Mills, K. D, Munroe, K. J., & Hall, C. R. (2001). The relationship between imagery and self-efcacy in competitive athletes. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 20, 3339. Moritz, S., Hall, C. R., Martin, K., & Vadocz, E. (1996). What are condent athletes imaging? An examination of image content. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 171179. Morris, T., Spittle, M., & Watt, A. P. (2005). Imagery in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Munroe, K. J., Giacobbi, P. R., Hall, C., & Weinberg, R. (2000). The four Ws of imagery use: where, when, why, and what. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 119137. Munroe, K., Hall, C., Simms, S., & Weinberg, R. (1998). The inuence of type of sport and time of season on athletes use of imagery. The Sport Psychologist, 12, 440449. Munroe-Chandler, K. J., & Hall, C. R. (2005). Enhancing the collective efcacy of a soccer team through motivational general-mastery imagery. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 24(1), 5167. Munroe-Chandler, K. J., Hall, C., Fishburne, G., & Strachan, L. (2007). Where, when and why athletes use imagery: an examination of developmental differences. Research Quarterly for Sport and Exercise, 78(2), 103116. Munroe-Chandler, K. J., Hall, C., & Fishburne, G., O., J., & Hall, N. D. (2007). The content of young athletes imagery use: a developmental perspective. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 5(2), 158174. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGrawHill. Nordin, S. M., & Cumming, J. (2005). Professional dancers describe their imagery: where, when, what, why, and how. The Sport Psychologist, 19, 395416. Paivio, A. (1985). Cognitive and motivational functions of imagery in human performance. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 2228. Short, S. E., Monsma, E. V., & Short, M. W. (2004). Is what you see really what you get? Athletes perceptions of imagery functions. The Sport Psychologist, 18, 341349. Stadulis, R. E., MacCracken, M. J., Eidson, T. A., & Severance, C. (2002). A childrens form of the competitive state anxiety inventory: the CSAI-2C. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 6(3), 147165.

1546

K. Munroe-Chandler et al.
Vealey, R. S., Hayashi, S. W., Garner-Holman, M., & Giacobbi, P. (1998). Sources of sport-condence: conceptualization of instrument development. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20, 5480. White, A., & Hardy, L. (1998). An in-depth analysis of the uses of imagery by high level slalom canoeists and artistic gymnasts. The Sport Psychologist, 12, 387403.

Vadocz, E. A., Hall, C., & Moritz, S. E. (1997). The relationship between competitive anxiety and imagery use. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 9, 241252. Vealey, R. S. (1986). Conceptualizations of sport condence and competitive orientation: preliminary investigation and instrument development. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 221246. Vealey, R. S. (2001). Understanding and enhancing self-condence in athletes. In R. N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas & C. M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 550 565).New York: Wiley.