Dynamic motor imagery but not pre-execution movements enhances serve tennis performance

Dynamic motor imagery but not pre-execution movements enhances serve tennis performance | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Dynamic motor imagery but not pre-execution movements enhances serve tennis performance Nicolas Robin, Tom Bonnin, Franck Di Rienzo, Aymeric Guillot, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Pre-serve preparatory movements including imagery and air movements are commonly observed in tennis players during both training and competition. The present study (ACTES URp5­4-2025-05) compared the effects of pre-performance explicit dynamic motor imagery (MI) and slight preparatory movements in young non-expert tennis players. Twelve players (M=12.77 years) with 4 to 6 years of regular practice completed four counterbalanced experimental conditions, namely Control (neutral counting task), Dynamic MI (external visual imagery combined with slight movements mimicking the serve), Slight movements and Slight movements plus countdown. Each session included a standardized warm-up followed by 10 second serves performed in match-like conditions. Serve success percentage, serve speed, technical quality and efficiency were used as performance indicators. Results revealed significantly higher performance in the Dynamic MI condition compared with the Control and both Slight movement conditions. In contrast, performing slight preparatory movements in isolation did not enhance serve performance. These findings suggest that combining imagery with congruent movements may facilitate motor preparation in young players, whereas movements performed without structured imagery may be insufficient to support performance gains. Overall, these results highlight the importance of explicitly guided dynamic MI when preparing the tennis serve in youth athletes. Mental training Dynamic imagery Tennis serve Youth athletes Motor performance Figures Figure 1 Introduction According to Cece et al. (2022), achieving high performance in racket sports requires the development of physiological, technical, tactical, and mental skills. Accordingly, motor imagery (MI) has been identified as a particularly prominent strategy, especially in tennis (Robin & Dominique, 2022). MI is commonly defined as the visual or kinesthetic mental representation of a movement performed without its actual physical execution (Jayalaksshme Srinivasan et al., 2025). This cognitive process, which involves the internal simulation of a motor action (Robin et al., 2024), is known to recruit sensorimotor neural networks that substantially overlap with those underlying overt movement execution (Mustile et al., 2024). More specifically, MI engages premotor regions involved in movement planning, including the premotor cortex and supplementary motor areas, as well as the inferior and superior parietal lobules, which contribute to sensory integration and motor intention. Subcortical structures such as the basal ganglia and cerebellum are also consistently involved, reflecting their role in movement adjustment and postural control (Hardwick et al., 2018; Hétu et al., 2013). This convergence in neural recruitment supports the principle of neurofunctional equivalence between imagined and executed actions (Jeannerod, 2001), which is widely considered one of the main mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of MI in the development of motor performance (Guillot, 2024). In sport settings, MI is typically implemented alongside physical practice to facilitate motor learning and enhance performance (Ladda et al., 2021). This mental technique can be effectively used with adults as well as with children and adolescents (Guilbert & Fernandez, 2025; Schuster et al., 2021), with well-documented benefits in tennis (Robin & Dominique, 2022). Indeed, numerous studies have highlighted the value of integrating MI into both training sessions and competitive contexts (e.g., Deng et al., 2024; Dominique et al., 2024; Robin et al., 2025). Performing MI on court with the racket in hand, has been shown to facilitate visualization processes and improve the clarity of the mental representations (Guillot et al., 2005; Robin & Dominique, 2022; Guillot, 2024). The effectiveness of MI interventions in sport is generally attributed to their cognitive and motivational functions (Cumming & Ste-Marie, 2001). For instance, athletes may mentally rehearse upcoming motor sequences before or during competition to enhance self-confidence and concentration (Bonnin et al., 2025). In tennis, players can mentally simulate discrete skills such as forehand and backhand groundstrokes (e.g., Hegazy et al., 2015; Robin et al., 2025), serve return (Coelho et al., 2007; Robin et al., 2007) or the serve itself (e.g., Cherappurah et al., 2020; Dominique et al., 2024). Such imagery can be incorporated into pre-performance routines (e.g., Dominique et al., 2021), or used during training to support motor learning and performance gains (e.g., Guillot et al., 2013). For example, Féry and Morizot (2000) reported improved serve accuracy in novice players following MI practice, while Mamassis (2005) observed increased serve speed in young tennis players who received imagery training. Observational reports suggest that tennis players often produce spontaneous preparatory movements after an error or prior to serving (Martin, 2018). Based on this observation, more recent research has investigated whether explicit dynamic MI could further enhance serve performance in non-expert players. In this regard, Bonnin et al. (2025) reported greater performance (e.g., higher percentage of successful serves and quality scores) following dynamic MI, compared with both static MI and a control condition that did not involve any preparatory movement before serving. Indeed, Dynamic MI here refers to the combination of MI with limited-amplitude movements of the hand or arm performed concurrently with the imagined action (Robin et al., 2019). As highlighted by Di Rienzo et al. (2016), adopting a congruent body position and embodying the spatial and/or temporal invariants of a motor action without fully executing it may enhance imagery quality and improve temporal congruence between the imagined movement and the actual motor pattern (Guillot et al., 2013; 2021), hence reinforcing the well-established benefits of MI on motor performance (Guillot, 2024). Along the same lines, Guillot et al. (2021) suggested that incorporating slight movements into the imagery process would enable athletes to benefit from the synergistic effects provided by the guidance of movement during imagination (see also Guillot & Di Rienzo, 2025). Consistent with this perspective, Bonnin et al. (2025) proposed that the addition of slight movements during dynamic MI may improve both temporal congruence and technical quality of the serve, two key determinants of performance in young tennis players. However, several questions arise from these findings and the broader literature on dynamic MI. Specifically, it is unclear whether the performance benefits observed in dynamic MI conditions may partly stem from the slight movements that mimic key components of the action. Alternatively, it is possible that executing such movements could facilitate the activation of movement-related representations, thus contributing to performance gains comparable to those reported with dynamic MI. This assumption may help explain why many tennis players spontaneously produce similar preparatory movements during training and competition. The present study aimed to compare the effect of pre-performance explicit dynamic MI and the execution of slight preparatory movements on serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. In line with previous findings reported by Bonnin et al. (2025), we hypothesized that performance would be higher in the dynamic MI condition (i.e., external visual imagery combined with slight movements mimicking the serve prior to physical execution) than in the control condition involving a neutral counting task before serving. Furthermore, to assess whether slight preparatory movements alone would contribute to performance changes, two additional conditions were included. The first involved performing slight movement only (i.e., without any concomitant task) before serving, whereas the second combined slight preparatory movement with a neutral countdown task prior to serve execution. Methods Participants An a priori power analysis was conducting using G*Power 3.1 software. Based on expected effect size of 0.45 (Bonnin et al., 2025 ), and an alpha level set at 0.05, the required sample size was estimated at N = 12 (critical F = 2.89, achieved power = 0.95). Twelve young non-expert players (all males; M age = 12.77 years, SD = 0.86) with between 4 and 6 years of regular practice, thus volunteered to participate in this experiment. Written informed consent was obtained from both participants and their parents. The study was approved by the local ethics committee of the Université des Antilles (ACTES URp5­4-2025-05) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). Material and task The experiment followed a within-subject cross-over design in which each participant completed four counterbalanced experimental sessions conducted on an outdoor tennis court. Across sessions, players performed a standardized serve task under four preparatory conditions (Control, Dynamic MI, Slight movement, and Slight movement plus countdown), allowing serve performance to be compared within participants. Participants first completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire for Children (MIQ-C; Martini et al., 2016 ) to ensure adequate imagery ability MI (for a similar procedure, see Robin et al., 2023 ). This questionnaire assesses young athlete’s ability to imagine four movements using: internal visual, external visual and kinesthetic imagery modalities. Players rated the ease or difficulty of generating each mental representation on a 7- point Likert scale (from 1 = very hard to see/feel to 7 = very easy to see/feel how difficult or easy) the ease or difficulty with which they were able to imagine the motor action. The MIQ-C demonstrated adequate internal reliability (Quinton et al., 2014) for internal visual imagery (α = 0.74), external visual imagery (α = 0.70) and kinesthetic imagery (α = 0.85). Serve performance was assessed using a standardized serving task. After a standardized 30-minute warm-up, participants performed 10 second serves while facing an opponent. They were informed of the number of trials and instructed to serve for the serve box, while alternating diagonals after each attempt (see Robin et al., 2023 for a similar procedure). All trials were recorded using two Canon HD Legria HF G25 cameras positioned on the court. Serve speed was measured with a radar gun (Cordless MPH radar Gun Type R1000), and serve success percentage (i.e., number of balls landing in the correct serve box) was computed using Swing Vision software on a tablet. In the Control condition, players counted backward from 10 to 0 at a rate of one number per second before serving (see Robin et al., 2022 ). In the Dynamic MI condition, players performed slight movements mimicking the serve while engaging in external visual imagery of the ball trajectory and target prior to execution (see Bonnin et al., 2025 ). In the Slight movement condition, players performed slight preparatory movement only before serving. In the Slight movement plus countdown condition, players performed the same slight movements while counting backward before serving, to limit the use of deliberate imagery. At the end of each session, players were questioned to ensure compliance with the instructions, regarding imagery use in the Dynamic MI condition, and adherence to task instructions in the other conditions (in particular whether they performed MI spontaneously or not in the Slight movement conditions). Data Analysis The MIQ-C ability scores, which served as a control variable, were calculated to ensure that none of the participants had difficulties in performing MI (see Robin et al., 2023 for a similar procedure). Percentage of success, serve speed, technical quality, and efficiency scores used as dependant variables. The technical quality score was based on six components (players’ starting position, ball throw, backward arm-racket movement, forward arm-racket movement, point of contact, and follow-through), each rated on a scale from 0 (poor) to 7 (excellent) (see Robin et al., 2023 for a similar procedure). The efficiency score reflected the degree of difficulty experienced by the receiver following the serve and was rated on a scale from 0 (ball in the net or fault) to 5 (ace). Both scores were independently evaluated from video recordings by two certified tennis coaches who were external to the research team and blind to the experiment aims (Bonnin et al., 2025 ). Inter-rater reliability for technical quality and efficiency scores was assessed using Cohen's kappa and indicated strong levels of agreement (κ > 0.88 and κ > 0.90 respectively). The four dependant variables were analysed using repeated-measures ANOVAs with Condition (Control vs. Dynamic MI vs. Slight movement vs. Slight movement plus countdown) as the within-subject factor. All analyses were performed using Statistica (12, 64-bit). Assumption of normality and homogeneity of variance were verified using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene’s tests, respectively. The alpha level was set at 0.05, partial eta squared (ηp2) were reported as the measure of effect-size, and Bonferroni adjusted post-hoc tests were conducted when appropriate. Results Imagery abilty As shown in Table 1 , all participants reported good imagery ability (Robin & Blandin, 2021), with no indication of difficulty in performing MI. Table 1 Visual and kinesthetic Movement Imagery Questionnaire for Children ( MIQ-C) scores Participants Internal Visual External Visual Kinesthetic Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD N = 12 4.35 1.08 5.01 0.87 4.21 1.29 Percentage of Success The repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on serve percentage of success revealed a significant main effect of Condition [ F (3, 33) = 85.8, p < .001, η p 2 = 0.88]. Post-hoc comparisons indicated that players achieved a higher success percentage in the Dynamic MI condition (M = 68.33%) than in the Control (M = 43.3%; p < .01), Slight movement (M = 38.3%; p < .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M = 41.6%; p < .01) conditions (see in Fig. 1 A). Speed The repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on serve speed revealed a significant main effect of Condition [ F (3, 33) = 20.44 p = < .001, η p 2 = 0.65]. As shown in Fig. 1 B, post-hoc comparisons revealed that players performed faster serves in the Dynamic MI condition (M = 83.9 km/h) than in the Control (M = 76.7 km/h; p < .01), Slight movement (M = 71.4 km/h; p < .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M = 73.4 km/h; p < .01) conditions. Serve speed was also higher in the Control condition than in the Slight movement condition ( p < .05). Technical score The repeated-measures ANOVA performed on technical quality scores revealed a significant main effect of Condition [ F (3, 33) = 5.68, p < .05, η p 2 = 0.34]. Post-hoc comparisons indicated that players achieved higher technical quality scores in the Dynamic MI condition (M = 2.14) than in the Slight movement (M = 2.05; p < .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M = 2.04; p < .01) conditions (see Fig. 1 C). Efficiency score The repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on efficiency scores revealed a significant main effect of Condition [ F (3, 33) = 63.13, p < .01, η p 2 = 0.85]. Post-hoc comparisons showed that players achieved higher efficiency scores in the Dynamic MI condition (M = 16.33) than in the Control (M = 10.7; p < .01), Slight movement (M = 9.16; p < .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M = 8.9; p < .01) conditions (see Fig. 1 D). In addition, efficiency scores were lower in the Slight movement plus countdown condition than in the Control condition ( p < .05). Discussion The present study aimed to compare the effects of pre-performance explicit dynamic MI and slight preparatory movements on second-serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. The main finding was that dynamic MI including slight movements prior to execution significantly enhanced performance, with players achieving higher serve success percentage, serve speed, technical quality, and efficiency scores. These findings are consistent with previous research demonstrating the beneficial effects of MI on sport performance (e.g., Ladda et al., 2021 ; Simonsmeier et al., 2021 ), including in tennis (for review see Cece et al., 2020 ; Deng et al., 2024 ; Robin & Dominique, 2022 ), and more specifically support the growing evidence for the effectiveness of dynamic MI (e.g., Guillot et al., 2013 ; Kanthack et al., 2016 ; Bonnin et al., 2025 ). From a mechanistic perspective, combining MI with limited amplitude movements likely enhances the functional coupling between simulated and executed actions. Such congruent motor engagement may facilitate the activation of sensorimotor representations, improve temporal congruence, and strengthen motor planning processes during pre-performance preparation. This interpretation is in line with previous work showing that adopting a congruent body position and embodying key spatial and temporal invariants of the movement can optimize imagery quality and subsequent motor performance (Di Rienzo et al., 2016 ; Guillot et al., 2021 ; Guillot, 2024 ). Combining MI with limited-amplitude movements has been shown to enhance imagery quality and sport performance in both adults and younger athletes (Callow et al., 2006 ; Guillot, 2024 ; Bonnin et al., 2025 ; Guillot et al., 2013 ; Robin et al., 2023 ). Performing MI in an ecologically valid context, such as on court with the racket in hand, may further facilitate access to task-relevant mental representations (Guillot et al., 2015). In this perspective, the integration of slight movements during imagery may specifically support the temporal and technical organization of the tennis serve (Bonnin et al., 2025 ; Guillot, 2024 ), likely through guidance and facilitation processes occurring during mental rehearsal. Importantly, although some players are commonly observed performing preparatory air movements before serving (Martin, 2018 ), present findings do not support the effectiveness of slight movements performed in isolation in young non-expert tennis players. Compared to the Control condition, neither the Slight movement nor the Slight movement plus countdown conditions improved serve success or technical quality. Serve speed and efficiency were even lower in these conditions. Several mechanisms may account for this absence of benefit. First, slight movements performed without structured imagery may have imposed an additional attentional load without providing sufficient representational support. In young players, whose attentional resources and motor representations are still developing, such dual demands may have disrupted rather than facilitated motor preparation. This interpretation is further supported by the Slight movement plus countdown condition, in which the additional counting task may have increased cognitive load. Second, the limited amplitude and simplified nature of the preparatory movements may have been insufficient to effectively prime the sensorimotor system. Without precise temporal and spatial congruence with the upcoming serve, these movements may remain too impoverished to promote functional benefits. Third, executing partial movements immediately before performance may have introduced subtle motor interference effects, particularly in young non-expert players. Finally, participants were young players, and imagery abilities at this age are still maturing (Guilbert et al., 2018 ). Previous research suggests that children may generate less vivid, less controllable, and less temporally accurate motor images than adults, which may limit the spontaneous emergence of effective action representations during unstructured preparatory behaviors (Behrendt et al., 2021 ; Guilbert et al., 2018 ). Accordingly, recent recommendations emphasize that MI interventions in youth must be carefully structured and guided because the cognitive and imagery-related functions supporting MI are not yet fully developed (Guilbert & Fernandez, 2025 ). Consequently, more explicit guidance, even during dynamic MI, may be particularly important in youth populations to scaffold effective mental simulation and motor preparation (Behrendt et al., 2021 ). The current study is not without limitations. First, the relatively small sample size, although determined a priori and consistent with previous comparable within-subjects designs (e.g., Bonnin et al., 2025 ; Dana et al., 2017; Dominique & Robin, 2024 ; Robin et al., 2022 ), warrants cautious generalizations and should be replicated in larger cohorts. Second, compliance and imagery use were assessed through post-session self-reports. Given the young age of the participants, the accuracy of retrospective self-evaluation may be limited, and future studies would benefit from incorporating complementary objective or online measures of imagery engagement. Future studies may also benefit from increasing the number of serve trials to further strengthen measurement reliability Conclusion This aim of this study was to compare the effects of pre-performance dynamic MI and slight preparatory movements on serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. The results clearly indicate that explicit dynamic MI enhanced serve success, speed, technical quality and efficiency, whereas slight movement performed alone did not confer performance gains. From an applied perspective, these findings suggest that young tennis players should be encouraged to combine MI with congruent preparatory movements rather than relying on movements alone when preparing to serve. Declarations Competing Interests We have no conflicts of interest to declare. Author Contribution N.R wrote the main manuscript text, rewiew and Editing project administration L.D. and A.G and F.DR. and NR. Methodology, ConceptualizationT.B and N.R. Investigation, Vizualisation writing, Table and FigureAll authors rewiewed the manuscript Acknowledgement We would like to thank the participants who took part in this study, their parents, as well as the sporting director and the club's management. Data Availability The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation. References Behrendt, F., Zumbrunnen, V., Brem, L., Suica, Z., Gäumann, S., Ziller, C., Gerth, U., & Schuster-Amft, C. (2021). Effect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International journal of environmental research and public health , 18 (18), 9467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189467 Bonnin, T., Carien, R., Michineau, L., Joseph-Jacques, V., Dominique, L., & Robin, N. (2025). Improving service performance in young tennis players: the superiority of dynamic over static motor imagery. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2025.2549885 Callow, N., Roberts, R., & Fawkes, J. Z. (2006). Effects of dynamic and static imagery on vividness of imagery, skiing performance, and confidence. Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity , 1 , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2202/1932-0191.1001 Cece, V., Guillet-Descas, E., & Martinent, G. (2020). Mental training program in racket sports: A systematic review. International Journal of Racket Sports Science , 2 (1), 55–71. Cherappurath, N., Elayaraja, M., Kabeer, D. A., Anjum, A., Vogazianos, P., & Antoniades, A. (2020). PETTLEP imagery and tennis service performance: an applied investigation. Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity , 15 (1), 20190013. https://doi.org/10.1515/jirspa-2019-0013 Coelho, R. W., De Campos, W., Silva, S. G. D., Okazaki, F. H. A., & Keller, B. (2007). Imagery intervention in open and closed tennis motor skill performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 105 (2), 458–468. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.105.2.458- 468 Cumming, J., & Ste-Marie, D. M. (2001). The cognitive and motivational effects of imagery training: A matter of perspective. The Sport Psychologist , 15 , 276–287. Dana, A., & Gozalzadeh, E. (2017). Internal and external imagery effects on tennis skills among novices. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 124 (5), 1022–1043. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512517719611 Deng, N., Soh, K. G., Abdullah, B. B., & Huang, D. (2024). Does Motor Imagery Training Improve Service Performance in Tennis Players? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Behavioral Sciences (Basel Switzerland) , 14 (3), 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14030207 Di Rienzo, F., Debarnot, U., Daligault, S., Saruco, E., Delpuech, C., Doyon, J., Collet, C., & Guillot, A. (2016). Online and Offline Performance Gains Following Motor Imagery Practice: A Comprehensive Review of Behavioral and Neuroimaging Studies. Frontiers in human neuroscience , 10 , 315. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00315 Dominique, L., Coudevylle, G., & Robin, N. (2021). Effet d’une routine centrée sur l’imagerie mentale et sur l’efficacité du service chez des joueurs de tennis experts. Staps , 134 (4), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.3917/sta.pr1.0027 Dominique, L., & Robin, N. (2024). A routine combining motivational self-talk and mental imagery improves service performance. ITF Coaching and Sport Science Review , 92 , 10–13. https://doi.org/10.52383/itfcoaching.v33i92.462 Féry, Y. A., & Morizot, P. (2000). Kinesthetic and visual images in modelling closed motor skills: the example of the tennis serve. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 90 , 707–722. Guilbert, J., & Fernandez, J. (2025). Best practice for improving children’s and adolescents’ sport skills with motor imagery. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 18 (2), 781–822. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2023.2289124 Guilbert, J., Jouen, F., & Molina, M. (2018). Motor imagery development and proprioceptive integration: Which sensory reweighting during childhood? Journal of experimental child psychology , 166 , 621–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.09.023 Guillot, A. (2024). Les pouvoirs insoupçonnés de la visualisation. Manuel ultime de préparation mentale intégrée des sportifs. [The Unexpected Powers of Visualization: The Ultimate Manual of Integrated Mental Preparation for Athletes] . Editions Solar. Guillot, A., Collet, C., & Dittmar, A. (2005). Influence of environmental context on motor imagery quality. Biology of Sport , 22 , 215–226. Guillot, A., Desliens, S., Rouyer, C., & Rogowski, I. (2013). Motor imagery and tennis serve performance: The external focus efficacy. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine , 12 (2), 332–338. Guillot, A., & Di Rienzo, F. (2025). Dynamic motor imagery use for sports performance. In M. Spittle, D. McNeil, R. Lindsay, & C. Frank (Eds.), The Psychology of Mental Imagery in Movement and Action . Routledge. Guillot, A., Di Rienzo, F. D., Frank, C., Debarnot, U., & MacIntyre, T. E. (2021). From simulation to motor execution: a review of the impact of dynamic motor imagery on performance. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 17 (1), 420–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.2007539 Guillot, A., Genevois, C., Desliens, S., Saieb, S., & Rogowski, I. (2012). Motor imagery and placebo-racket effects in tennis serve performance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 13 , 533–540. Guillot, A., Moschberger, K., & Collet, C. (2013). Coupling movement with imagery as a new perspective for motor imagery practice. Behavioral and Brain Functions , 9 , 8. Hanakawa, T. (2016). Organizing motor imageries. Neuroscience Research , 104 , 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2015.11.003 Hardwick, R. M., Caspers, S., Eickhoff, S. B., & Swinnen, S. P. (2018). Neural correlates of action: Comparing meta-analyses of imagery, observation, and execution. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews , 94 , 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.08.003 Hegazy, K., Sherif, A., & Houta, S. (2015). The effect of mental training on motor performance of tennis and field hockey strokes in novice players. Advances in Physical Education , 5 , 77–83. Hétu, S., Grégoire, M., Saimpont, A., Coll, M. P., Eugene, F., Michon, P. E., et al. (2013). The neural network of motor imagery: an ALE meta-analysis. Neurosciences and Biobehavioral Review , 37 , 930–949. Kanthack, T. F. D., Guillot, A., Altimari, R., Nagy, N. S., Collet, C., & Di Rienzo, F. (2016). Selective efficacy of static and dynamic imagery in different states of physical fatigue. PLoS One , 11 (3), 0149654. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149654 Jayalaksshme Srinivasan, K., Periasamy, P., & Gunasekaran, S. (2025). Motor Imagery and Motor Execution: A Narrative Review of Electroencephalographic (EEG) Signatures, Methodological Consistency, and Translational Applications. Cureus , 17 (9), e93011. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.93011 Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage , 14 , S103–S109. Ladda, A. M., Lebon, F., & Lotze, M. (2021). Using motor imagery practice for improving motor performance—A review. Brain Cognition , 150 , 105705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105705 Mamassis, G. (2005). Improving serving speed in young tennis players. ITF Coaching Sport Science Review , 35 , 3–4. Martin, C. (2018). Tennis: optimisation de la performance . Performance optimization]. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck. Martini, R., Carter, M. J., Yoxon, E., Cumming, J., & Ste-Marie, D. M. (2016). Development and validation of the movement imagery questionnaire for children (MIQ-C). Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 22 , 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.008 Mustile, M., Kourtis, D., Edwards, M. G., Donaldson, D. I., & Ietswaart, M. (2024). Neural correlates of motor imagery and execution in real-world dynamic behavior: evidence for similarities and differences. Frontiers in human neuroscience , 18 , 1412307. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1412307 Robin, N., & Blandin, Y. (2021). Imagery ability classification: Commentary on «Kinaesthetic imagery ability moderates the effect of an AO + MI intervention on golf putt performance: A pilot study» by McNeill et al. (2020). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5 7, 102030. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.102030 Robin, N., Carien, R., & Dominique, L. (2022). Tennis service performance in beginners: The effect of instructional self-talk combined with motor imagery. Journal of Motor Learning and Development , 10 (1), 200–211. https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2021-0044 Robin, N., Carien, R., Ouarti, Y., & Dominique, L. (2025). Beneficial effects of imagination of successful action after an actual error on baseline performances in non-expert young tennis players. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung , 89 , 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02051-7 Robin, N., Carien, R., Taktek, K., Hatchi, V., & Dominique, L. (2023). Effects of motor imagery training on service performance in novice tennis players: the role of imagery ability. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 22 (5), 1070–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2023.2191628 Robin, N., & Dominique, L. (2022). Mental imagery and tennis: A review, applied recommendations and new research directions. Movement and Sports Sciences , 10 , 9. https://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2022009 Robin, N., Dominique, L., Guillet-Descas, E., & Hue, O. (2022). Beneficial effects of motor imagery and self-talk on service performance in skilled tennis players. Frontiers in Psychology , 2022, 13, 778468. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.778468 Robin, N., Toussaint, L., Charles-Charlery, C., & Coudevylle, G. R. (2019). Free throw performance in non-expert basketball players: The effect of dynamic motor imagery combined with action observation. Learning and Motivation , 68 , 101595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101595 Simonsmeier, B. A., Andronie, M., Buecker, S., & Frank, C. (2021). The effects of imagery interventions in sports: A meta-analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 14 (1), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2020.1780627 Schuster, C., Hilfiker, R., Amft, O., Scheidhauer, A., Andrews, B., Butler, J., Kischka, U., & Ettlin, T. (2011). Best practice for motor imagery: a systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. BMC medicine , 9 , 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-75 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 04 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 26 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 17 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Mar, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 12 Mar, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 26 Feb, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 25 Feb, 2026 First submitted to journal 25 Feb, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8967123","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":605635437,"identity":"035471bd-8936-4376-8395-1f9e3b4d315f","order_by":0,"name":"Nicolas Robin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Université des Antilles","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nicolas","middleName":"","lastName":"Robin","suffix":""},{"id":605635438,"identity":"7ceff738-839a-4e2d-a8ed-bd4b677f6dc0","order_by":1,"name":"Tom Bonnin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Université des Antilles","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tom","middleName":"","lastName":"Bonnin","suffix":""},{"id":605635439,"identity":"8bf50149-909d-4e49-a8c1-7a86e303ff78","order_by":2,"name":"Franck Di Rienzo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Université Lyon 1, LIBM","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Franck","middleName":"Di","lastName":"Rienzo","suffix":""},{"id":605635440,"identity":"b3a11ae0-2244-4a4c-848c-cf9b7097ec19","order_by":3,"name":"Aymeric Guillot","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Université Lyon 1, LIBM","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aymeric","middleName":"","lastName":"Guillot","suffix":""},{"id":605635442,"identity":"2ea9f613-1a85-4da8-8aa4-d12645eba5de","order_by":4,"name":"Laurent Dominique","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Reunion Island","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Laurent","middleName":"","lastName":"Dominique","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-02-25 11:24:42","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":104751477,"identity":"83f2db2a-24a1-4828-a20b-5c4e9e20e90a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-16 19:56:01","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":212958,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSignificant main effect of Condition (Control vs. Slight movement vs. Slight movement plus countdown vs. Dynamic MI) for the percentage of success serve (A), Serve speed (B), Technical score (C) and Efficiency score (D). (* \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05; ** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8967123/v1/4ff29da2f9e57090e43c85ca.png"},{"id":104782862,"identity":"193ae353-3873-45a5-93bf-2f422f6017e2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-17 07:57:53","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":641913,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8967123/v1/1e6f46e1-f1ff-4c79-ad86-dbef4a2166f6.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Dynamic motor imagery but not pre-execution movements enhances serve tennis performance","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccording to Cece et al. (2022), achieving high performance in racket sports requires the development of physiological, technical, tactical, and mental skills. Accordingly, motor imagery (MI) has been identified as a particularly prominent strategy, especially in tennis (Robin \u0026amp; Dominique, 2022). MI is commonly defined as the visual or kinesthetic mental representation of a movement performed without its actual physical execution (Jayalaksshme Srinivasan et al., 2025). This cognitive process, which involves the internal simulation of a motor action (Robin et al., 2024), is known to recruit sensorimotor neural networks that substantially overlap with those underlying overt movement execution (Mustile et al., 2024). More specifically, MI engages premotor regions involved in movement planning, including the premotor cortex and supplementary motor areas, as well as the inferior and superior parietal lobules, which contribute to sensory integration and motor intention. Subcortical structures such as the basal ganglia and cerebellum are also consistently involved, reflecting their role in movement adjustment and postural control (Hardwick et al., 2018; Hétu et al., 2013). This convergence in neural recruitment supports the principle of neurofunctional equivalence between imagined and executed actions (Jeannerod, 2001), which is widely considered one of the main mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of MI in the development of motor performance (Guillot, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;In sport settings, MI is typically implemented alongside physical practice to facilitate motor learning and enhance performance (Ladda et al., 2021). This mental technique can be effectively used with adults as well as with children and adolescents (Guilbert \u0026amp; Fernandez, 2025; Schuster et al., 2021), with well-documented benefits in tennis (Robin \u0026amp; Dominique, 2022). Indeed, numerous studies have highlighted the value of integrating MI into both training sessions and competitive contexts (e.g., Deng et al., 2024; Dominique et al., 2024; Robin et al., 2025). Performing MI on court with the racket in hand, has been shown to facilitate visualization processes and improve the clarity of the mental representations (Guillot et al., 2005; Robin \u0026amp; Dominique, 2022; Guillot, 2024). The effectiveness of MI interventions in sport is generally attributed to their cognitive and motivational functions (Cumming \u0026amp; Ste-Marie, 2001). For instance, athletes may mentally rehearse upcoming motor sequences before or during competition to enhance self-confidence and concentration (Bonnin et al., 2025). In tennis, players can mentally simulate discrete skills such as forehand and backhand groundstrokes (e.g., Hegazy et al., 2015; Robin et al., 2025), serve return (Coelho et al., 2007; Robin et al., 2007) or the serve itself (e.g., Cherappurah et al., 2020; Dominique et al., 2024). \u0026nbsp;Such imagery can be incorporated into pre-performance routines (e.g., Dominique et al., 2021), or used during training to support motor learning and performance gains (e.g., Guillot et al., 2013). For example, Féry and Morizot (2000) reported improved serve accuracy in novice players following MI practice, while Mamassis (2005) observed increased serve speed in young tennis players who received imagery training.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Observational reports suggest that tennis players often produce spontaneous preparatory movements after an error or prior to serving (Martin, 2018). Based on this observation, more recent research has investigated whether explicit dynamic MI could further enhance serve performance in non-expert players. In this regard, Bonnin et al. (2025) reported greater performance (e.g., higher percentage of successful serves and quality scores) following dynamic MI, compared with both static MI and a control condition that did not involve any preparatory movement before serving. Indeed, Dynamic MI here refers to the combination of MI with limited-amplitude movements of the hand or arm performed concurrently with the imagined action (Robin et al., 2019). As highlighted by Di Rienzo et al. (2016), adopting a congruent body position and embodying the spatial and/or temporal invariants of a motor action without fully executing it may enhance imagery quality and improve temporal congruence between the imagined movement and the actual motor pattern (Guillot et al., 2013; 2021), hence reinforcing the well-established benefits of MI on motor performance (Guillot, 2024). Along the same lines, Guillot et al. (2021) suggested that incorporating slight movements into the imagery process would enable athletes to benefit from the synergistic effects provided by the guidance of movement during imagination (see also Guillot \u0026amp; Di Rienzo, 2025). Consistent with this perspective, Bonnin et al. (2025) proposed that the addition of slight movements during dynamic MI may improve both temporal congruence and technical quality of the serve, two key determinants of performance in young tennis players.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, several questions arise from these findings and the broader literature on dynamic MI. Specifically, it is unclear whether the performance benefits observed in dynamic MI conditions may partly stem from the slight movements that mimic key components of the action. Alternatively, it is possible that executing such movements could facilitate the activation of movement-related representations, thus contributing to performance gains comparable to those reported with dynamic MI. This assumption may help explain why many tennis players spontaneously produce similar preparatory movements during training and competition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe present study aimed to compare the effect of pre-performance explicit dynamic MI and the execution of slight preparatory movements on serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. In line with previous findings reported by Bonnin et al. (2025), we hypothesized that performance would be higher in the dynamic MI condition (i.e., external visual imagery combined with slight movements mimicking the serve prior to physical execution) than in the control condition involving a neutral counting task before serving. Furthermore, to assess whether slight preparatory movements alone would contribute to performance changes, two additional conditions were included. The first involved performing slight movement only (i.e., without any concomitant task) before serving, whereas the second combined slight preparatory movement with a neutral countdown task prior to serve execution.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn a priori power analysis was conducting using G*Power 3.1 software. Based on expected effect size of 0.45 (Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), and an alpha level set at 0.05, the required sample size was estimated at N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12 (critical F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.89, achieved power\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.95). Twelve young non-expert players (all males; \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eage\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e = 12.77 years, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.86) with between 4 and 6 years of regular practice, thus volunteered to participate in this experiment. Written informed consent was obtained from both participants and their parents. The study was approved by the local ethics committee of the Universit\u0026eacute; des Antilles (ACTES URp5\u0026shy;4-2025-05) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMaterial and task\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe experiment followed a within-subject cross-over design in which each participant completed four counterbalanced experimental sessions conducted on an outdoor tennis court. Across sessions, players performed a standardized serve task under four preparatory conditions (Control, Dynamic MI, Slight movement, and Slight movement plus countdown), allowing serve performance to be compared within participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants first completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire for Children (MIQ-C; Martini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) to ensure adequate imagery ability MI (for a similar procedure, see Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This questionnaire assesses young athlete\u0026rsquo;s ability to imagine four movements using: internal visual, external visual and kinesthetic imagery modalities. Players rated the ease or difficulty of generating each mental representation on a 7- point Likert scale (from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very hard to see/feel to 7\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very easy to see/feel how difficult or easy) the ease or difficulty with which they were able to imagine the motor action. The MIQ-C demonstrated adequate internal reliability (Quinton et al., 2014) for internal visual imagery (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.74), external visual imagery (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70) and kinesthetic imagery (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eServe performance was assessed using a standardized serving task. After a standardized 30-minute warm-up, participants performed 10 second serves while facing an opponent. They were informed of the number of trials and instructed to serve for the serve box, while alternating diagonals after each attempt (see Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e for a similar procedure). All trials were recorded using two Canon HD Legria HF G25 cameras positioned on the court. Serve speed was measured with a radar gun (Cordless MPH radar Gun Type R1000), and serve success percentage (i.e., number of balls landing in the correct serve box) was computed using Swing Vision software on a tablet.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the Control condition, players counted backward from 10 to 0 at a rate of one number per second before serving (see Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In the Dynamic MI condition, players performed slight movements mimicking the serve while engaging in external visual imagery of the ball trajectory and target prior to execution (see Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). In the Slight movement condition, players performed slight preparatory movement only before serving. In the Slight movement plus countdown condition, players performed the same slight movements while counting backward before serving, to limit the use of deliberate imagery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the end of each session, players were questioned to ensure compliance with the instructions, regarding imagery use in the Dynamic MI condition, and adherence to task instructions in the other conditions (in particular whether they performed MI spontaneously or not in the Slight movement conditions).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe MIQ-C ability scores, which served as a control variable, were calculated to ensure that none of the participants had difficulties in performing MI (see Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e for a similar procedure).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePercentage of success, serve speed, technical quality, and efficiency scores used as dependant variables. The technical quality score was based on six components (players\u0026rsquo; starting position, ball throw, backward arm-racket movement, forward arm-racket movement, point of contact, and follow-through), each rated on a scale from 0 (poor) to 7 (excellent) (see Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e for a similar procedure). The efficiency score reflected the degree of difficulty experienced by the receiver following the serve and was rated on a scale from 0 (ball in the net or fault) to 5 (ace). Both scores were independently evaluated from video recordings by two certified tennis coaches who were external to the research team and blind to the experiment aims (Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Inter-rater reliability for technical quality and efficiency scores was assessed using Cohen's kappa and indicated strong levels of agreement (κ\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.88 and κ\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.90 respectively).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe four dependant variables were analysed using repeated-measures ANOVAs with Condition (Control vs. Dynamic MI vs. Slight movement vs. Slight movement plus countdown) as the within-subject factor. All analyses were performed using Statistica (12, 64-bit). Assumption of normality and homogeneity of variance were verified using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene\u0026rsquo;s tests, respectively. The alpha level was set at 0.05, partial eta squared (ηp2) were reported as the measure of effect-size, and Bonferroni adjusted post-hoc tests were conducted when appropriate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eImagery abilty\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, all participants reported good imagery ability (Robin \u0026amp; Blandin, 2021), with no indication of difficulty in performing MI.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eVisual and kinesthetic Movement Imagery Questionnaire for Children\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eMIQ-C) scores\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInternal Visual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExternal Visual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKinesthetic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eN\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003e= 12\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePercentage of Success\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on serve percentage of success revealed a significant main effect of Condition [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(3, 33)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;85.8, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.88]. Post-hoc comparisons indicated that players achieved a higher success percentage in the Dynamic MI condition (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;68.33%) than in the Control (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;43.3%; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01), Slight movement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;38.3%; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41.6%; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) conditions (see in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eA).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSpeed\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on serve speed revealed a significant main effect of Condition [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(3, 33)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20.44 \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65]. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eB, post-hoc comparisons revealed that players performed faster serves in the Dynamic MI condition (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;83.9 km/h) than in the Control (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;76.7 km/h; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01), Slight movement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;71.4 km/h; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;73.4 km/h; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) conditions. Serve speed was also higher in the Control condition than in the Slight movement condition (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTechnical score\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe repeated-measures ANOVA performed on technical quality scores revealed a significant main effect of Condition [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(3, 33)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.68, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.34]. Post-hoc comparisons indicated that players achieved higher technical quality scores in the Dynamic MI condition (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.14) than in the Slight movement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.05; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.04; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) conditions (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eC).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEfficiency score\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe repeated-measures ANOVA conducted on efficiency scores revealed a significant main effect of Condition [\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(3, 33)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;63.13, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85]. Post-hoc comparisons showed that players achieved higher efficiency scores in the Dynamic MI condition (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.33) than in the Control (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.7; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01), Slight movement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9.16; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) and Slight movement plus countdown (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.9; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01) conditions (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eD). In addition, efficiency scores were lower in the Slight movement plus countdown condition than in the Control condition (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study aimed to compare the effects of pre-performance explicit dynamic MI and slight preparatory movements on second-serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. The main finding was that dynamic MI including slight movements prior to execution significantly enhanced performance, with players achieving higher serve success percentage, serve speed, technical quality, and efficiency scores.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings are consistent with previous research demonstrating the beneficial effects of MI on sport performance (e.g., Ladda et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Simonsmeier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), including in tennis (for review see Cece et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Deng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Robin \u0026amp; Dominique, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), and more specifically support the growing evidence for the effectiveness of dynamic MI (e.g., Guillot et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Kanthack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). From a mechanistic perspective, combining MI with limited amplitude movements likely enhances the functional coupling between simulated and executed actions. Such congruent motor engagement may facilitate the activation of sensorimotor representations, improve temporal congruence, and strengthen motor planning processes during pre-performance preparation. This interpretation is in line with previous work showing that adopting a congruent body position and embodying key spatial and temporal invariants of the movement can optimize imagery quality and subsequent motor performance (Di Rienzo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Guillot et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Guillot, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Combining MI with limited-amplitude movements has been shown to enhance imagery quality and sport performance in both adults and younger athletes (Callow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Guillot, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Guillot et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Performing MI in an ecologically valid context, such as on court with the racket in hand, may further facilitate access to task-relevant mental representations (Guillot et al., 2015). In this perspective, the integration of slight movements during imagery may specifically support the temporal and technical organization of the tennis serve (Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Guillot, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), likely through guidance and facilitation processes occurring during mental rehearsal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eImportantly, although some players are commonly observed performing preparatory air movements before serving (Martin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), present findings do not support the effectiveness of slight movements performed in isolation in young non-expert tennis players. Compared to the Control condition, neither the Slight movement nor the Slight movement plus countdown conditions improved serve success or technical quality. Serve speed and efficiency were even lower in these conditions. Several mechanisms may account for this absence of benefit. First, slight movements performed without structured imagery may have imposed an additional attentional load without providing sufficient representational support. In young players, whose attentional resources and motor representations are still developing, such dual demands may have disrupted rather than facilitated motor preparation. This interpretation is further supported by the Slight movement plus countdown condition, in which the additional counting task may have increased cognitive load. Second, the limited amplitude and simplified nature of the preparatory movements may have been insufficient to effectively prime the sensorimotor system. Without precise temporal and spatial congruence with the upcoming serve, these movements may remain too impoverished to promote functional benefits. Third, executing partial movements immediately before performance may have introduced subtle motor interference effects, particularly in young non-expert players. Finally, participants were young players, and imagery abilities at this age are still maturing (Guilbert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Previous research suggests that children may generate less vivid, less controllable, and less temporally accurate motor images than adults, which may limit the spontaneous emergence of effective action representations during unstructured preparatory behaviors (Behrendt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Guilbert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, recent recommendations emphasize that MI interventions in youth must be carefully structured and guided because the cognitive and imagery-related functions supporting MI are not yet fully developed (Guilbert \u0026amp; Fernandez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, more explicit guidance, even during dynamic MI, may be particularly important in youth populations to scaffold effective mental simulation and motor preparation (Behrendt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe current study is not without limitations. First, the relatively small sample size, although determined a priori and consistent with previous comparable within-subjects designs (e.g., Bonnin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Dana et al., 2017; Dominique \u0026amp; Robin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Robin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), warrants cautious generalizations and should be replicated in larger cohorts. Second, compliance and imagery use were assessed through post-session self-reports. Given the young age of the participants, the accuracy of retrospective self-evaluation may be limited, and future studies would benefit from incorporating complementary objective or online measures of imagery engagement. Future studies may also benefit from increasing the number of serve trials to further strengthen measurement reliability\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis aim of this study was to compare the effects of pre-performance dynamic MI and slight preparatory movements on serve performance in young non-expert tennis players. The results clearly indicate that explicit dynamic MI enhanced serve success, speed, technical quality and efficiency, whereas slight movement performed alone did not confer performance gains. From an applied perspective, these findings suggest that young tennis players should be encouraged to combine MI with congruent preparatory movements rather than relying on movements alone when preparing to serve.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe have no conflicts of interest to declare.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eN.R wrote the main manuscript text, rewiew and Editing project administration L.D. and A.G and F.DR. and NR. Methodology, ConceptualizationT.B and N.R. Investigation, Vizualisation writing, Table and FigureAll authors rewiewed the manuscript\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe would like to thank the participants who took part in this study, their parents, as well as the sporting director and the club's management.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBehrendt, F., Zumbrunnen, V., Brem, L., Suica, Z., G\u0026auml;umann, S., Ziller, C., Gerth, U., \u0026amp; Schuster-Amft, C. (2021). Effect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of environmental research and public health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(18), 9467. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189467\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph18189467\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBonnin, T., Carien, R., Michineau, L., Joseph-Jacques, V., Dominique, L., \u0026amp; Robin, N. (2025). Improving service performance in young tennis players: the superiority of dynamic over static motor imagery. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;11. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2025.2549885\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1612197X.2025.2549885\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCallow, N., Roberts, R., \u0026amp; Fawkes, J. Z. (2006). Effects of dynamic and static imagery on vividness of imagery, skiing performance, and confidence. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2202/1932-0191.1001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2202/1932-0191.1001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCece, V., Guillet-Descas, E., \u0026amp; Martinent, G. (2020). Mental training program in racket sports: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Racket Sports Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(1), 55\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCherappurath, N., Elayaraja, M., Kabeer, D. A., Anjum, A., Vogazianos, P., \u0026amp; Antoniades, A. (2020). PETTLEP imagery and tennis service performance: an applied investigation. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 20190013. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1515/jirspa-2019-0013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1515/jirspa-2019-0013\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCoelho, R. W., De Campos, W., Silva, S. G. D., Okazaki, F. H. A., \u0026amp; Keller, B. (2007). Imagery intervention in open and closed tennis motor skill performance. \u003cem\u003ePerceptual and Motor Skills\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e105\u003c/em\u003e(2), 458\u0026ndash;468. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2466/pms.105.2.458- 468\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2466/pms.105.2.458- 468\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCumming, J., \u0026amp; Ste-Marie, D. M. (2001). The cognitive and motivational effects of imagery training: A matter of perspective. \u003cem\u003eThe Sport Psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 276\u0026ndash;287.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDana, A., \u0026amp; Gozalzadeh, E. (2017). Internal and external imagery effects on tennis skills among novices. \u003cem\u003ePerceptual and Motor Skills\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e124\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1022\u0026ndash;1043. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0031512517719611\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0031512517719611\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeng, N., Soh, K. G., Abdullah, B. B., \u0026amp; Huang, D. (2024). Does Motor Imagery Training Improve Service Performance in Tennis Players? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral Sciences (Basel Switzerland)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(3), 207. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/bs14030207\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/bs14030207\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDi Rienzo, F., Debarnot, U., Daligault, S., Saruco, E., Delpuech, C., Doyon, J., Collet, C., \u0026amp; Guillot, A. (2016). Online and Offline Performance Gains Following Motor Imagery Practice: A Comprehensive Review of Behavioral and Neuroimaging Studies. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in human neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e, 315. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00315\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fnhum.2016.00315\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDominique, L., Coudevylle, G., \u0026amp; Robin, N. (2021). Effet d\u0026rsquo;une routine centr\u0026eacute;e sur l\u0026rsquo;imagerie mentale et sur l\u0026rsquo;efficacit\u0026eacute; du service chez des joueurs de tennis experts. \u003cem\u003eStaps\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e134\u003c/em\u003e(4), 75\u0026ndash;91. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3917/sta.pr1.0027\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3917/sta.pr1.0027\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDominique, L., \u0026amp; Robin, N. (2024). A routine combining motivational self-talk and mental imagery improves service performance. \u003cem\u003eITF Coaching and Sport Science Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e92\u003c/em\u003e, 10\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.52383/itfcoaching.v33i92.462\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.52383/itfcoaching.v33i92.462\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eF\u0026eacute;ry, Y. A., \u0026amp; Morizot, P. (2000). Kinesthetic and visual images in modelling closed motor skills: the example of the tennis serve. \u003cem\u003ePerceptual and Motor Skills\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e90\u003c/em\u003e, 707\u0026ndash;722.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuilbert, J., \u0026amp; Fernandez, J. (2025). Best practice for improving children\u0026rsquo;s and adolescents\u0026rsquo; sport skills with motor imagery. \u003cem\u003eInternational Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(2), 781\u0026ndash;822. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2023.2289124\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1750984X.2023.2289124\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuilbert, J., Jouen, F., \u0026amp; Molina, M. (2018). Motor imagery development and proprioceptive integration: Which sensory reweighting during childhood? \u003cem\u003eJournal of experimental child psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e166\u003c/em\u003e, 621\u0026ndash;634. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.09.023\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jecp.2017.09.023\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A. (2024). \u003cem\u003eLes pouvoirs insoup\u0026ccedil;onn\u0026eacute;s de la visualisation. Manuel ultime de pr\u0026eacute;paration mentale int\u0026eacute;gr\u0026eacute;e des sportifs. [The Unexpected Powers of Visualization: The Ultimate Manual of Integrated Mental Preparation for Athletes]\u003c/em\u003e. Editions Solar.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., Collet, C., \u0026amp; Dittmar, A. (2005). Influence of environmental context on motor imagery quality. \u003cem\u003eBiology of Sport\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 215\u0026ndash;226.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., Desliens, S., Rouyer, C., \u0026amp; Rogowski, I. (2013). Motor imagery and tennis serve performance: The external focus efficacy. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Science \u0026amp; Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 332\u0026ndash;338.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., \u0026amp; Di Rienzo, F. (2025). Dynamic motor imagery use for sports performance. In M. Spittle, D. McNeil, R. Lindsay, \u0026amp; C. Frank (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Psychology of Mental Imagery in Movement and Action\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., Di Rienzo, F. D., Frank, C., Debarnot, U., \u0026amp; MacIntyre, T. E. (2021). From simulation to motor execution: a review of the impact of dynamic motor imagery on performance. \u003cem\u003eInternational Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(1), 420\u0026ndash;439. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.2007539\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1750984X.2021.2007539\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., Genevois, C., Desliens, S., Saieb, S., \u0026amp; Rogowski, I. (2012). Motor imagery and placebo-racket effects in tennis serve performance. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 533\u0026ndash;540.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuillot, A., Moschberger, K., \u0026amp; Collet, C. (2013). Coupling movement with imagery as a new perspective for motor imagery practice. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral and Brain Functions\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHanakawa, T. (2016). Organizing motor imageries. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e104\u003c/em\u003e, 56\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2015.11.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neures.2015.11.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHardwick, R. M., Caspers, S., Eickhoff, S. B., \u0026amp; Swinnen, S. P. (2018). Neural correlates of action: Comparing meta-analyses of imagery, observation, and execution. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e94\u003c/em\u003e, 31\u0026ndash;44. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.08.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.08.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHegazy, K., Sherif, A., \u0026amp; Houta, S. (2015). The effect of mental training on motor performance of tennis and field hockey strokes in novice players. \u003cem\u003eAdvances in Physical Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e, 77\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH\u0026eacute;tu, S., Gr\u0026eacute;goire, M., Saimpont, A., Coll, M. P., Eugene, F., Michon, P. E., et al. (2013). The neural network of motor imagery: an ALE meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eNeurosciences and Biobehavioral Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e, 930\u0026ndash;949.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKanthack, T. F. D., Guillot, A., Altimari, R., Nagy, N. S., Collet, C., \u0026amp; Di Rienzo, F. (2016). Selective efficacy of static and dynamic imagery in different states of physical fatigue. \u003cem\u003ePLoS One\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3), 0149654. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149654\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0149654\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJayalaksshme Srinivasan, K., Periasamy, P., \u0026amp; Gunasekaran, S. (2025). Motor Imagery and Motor Execution: A Narrative Review of Electroencephalographic (EEG) Signatures, Methodological Consistency, and Translational Applications. \u003cem\u003eCureus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(9), e93011. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.93011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.7759/cureus.93011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. \u003cem\u003eNeuroimage\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, S103\u0026ndash;S109.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLadda, A. M., Lebon, F., \u0026amp; Lotze, M. (2021). Using motor imagery practice for improving motor performance\u0026mdash;A review. \u003cem\u003eBrain Cognition\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e150\u003c/em\u003e, 105705. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105705\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105705\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMamassis, G. (2005). Improving serving speed in young tennis players. \u003cem\u003eITF Coaching Sport Science Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e, 3\u0026ndash;4.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMartin, C. (2018). \u003cem\u003eTennis: optimisation de la performance\u003c/em\u003e. Performance optimization]. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMartini, R., Carter, M. J., Yoxon, E., Cumming, J., \u0026amp; Ste-Marie, D. M. (2016). Development and validation of the movement imagery questionnaire for children (MIQ-C). \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e, 190\u0026ndash;201. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.008\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMustile, M., Kourtis, D., Edwards, M. G., Donaldson, D. I., \u0026amp; Ietswaart, M. (2024). Neural correlates of motor imagery and execution in real-world dynamic behavior: evidence for similarities and differences. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in human neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 1412307. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1412307\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fnhum.2024.1412307\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., \u0026amp; Blandin, Y. (2021). Imagery ability classification: Commentary on \u0026laquo;Kinaesthetic imagery ability moderates the effect of an AO\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;MI intervention on golf putt performance: A pilot study\u0026raquo; by McNeill et al. (2020). \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Sport and Exercise, 5\u003c/em\u003e7, 102030. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.102030\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.102030\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., Carien, R., \u0026amp; Dominique, L. (2022). Tennis service performance in beginners: The effect of instructional self-talk combined with motor imagery. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Motor Learning and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 200\u0026ndash;211. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2021-0044\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jmld.2021-0044\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., Carien, R., Ouarti, Y., \u0026amp; Dominique, L. (2025). Beneficial effects of imagination of successful action after an actual error on baseline performances in non-expert young tennis players. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Research Psychologische Forschung\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e89\u003c/em\u003e, 23. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02051-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00426-024-02051-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., Carien, R., Taktek, K., Hatchi, V., \u0026amp; Dominique, L. (2023). Effects of motor imagery training on service performance in novice tennis players: the role of imagery ability. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1070\u0026ndash;1082. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2023.2191628\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1612197X.2023.2191628\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., \u0026amp; Dominique, L. (2022). Mental imagery and tennis: A review, applied recommendations and new research directions. \u003cem\u003eMovement and Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e, 9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2022009\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1051/sm/2022009\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., Dominique, L., Guillet-Descas, E., \u0026amp; Hue, O. (2022). Beneficial effects of motor imagery and self-talk on service performance in skilled tennis players. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 2022, 13, 778468. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.778468\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2022.778468\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobin, N., Toussaint, L., Charles-Charlery, C., \u0026amp; Coudevylle, G. R. (2019). Free throw performance in non-expert basketball players: The effect of dynamic motor imagery combined with action observation. \u003cem\u003eLearning and Motivation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e68\u003c/em\u003e, 101595. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101595\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101595\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimonsmeier, B. A., Andronie, M., Buecker, S., \u0026amp; Frank, C. (2021). The effects of imagery interventions in sports: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(1), 186\u0026ndash;207. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2020.1780627\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1750984X.2020.1780627\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchuster, C., Hilfiker, R., Amft, O., Scheidhauer, A., Andrews, B., Butler, J., Kischka, U., \u0026amp; Ettlin, T. (2011). Best practice for motor imagery: a systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. \u003cem\u003eBMC medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 75. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-75\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/1741-7015-9-75\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"psychological-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"prpf","sideBox":"Learn more about [Psychological Research](http://link.springer.com/journal/426)","snPcode":"426","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/426/3","title":"Psychological Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Mental training, Dynamic imagery, Tennis serve, Youth athletes, Motor performance","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"Pre-serve preparatory movements including imagery and air movements are commonly observed in tennis players during both training and competition. The present study (ACTES URp5­4-2025-05) compared the effects of pre-performance explicit dynamic motor imagery (MI) and slight preparatory movements in young non-expert tennis players. Twelve players (M=12.77 years) with 4 to 6 years of regular practice completed four counterbalanced experimental conditions, namely Control (neutral counting task), Dynamic MI (external visual imagery combined with slight movements mimicking the serve), Slight movements and Slight movements plus countdown. Each session included a standardized warm-up followed by 10 second serves performed in match-like conditions. Serve success percentage, serve speed, technical quality and efficiency were used as performance indicators. Results revealed significantly higher performance in the Dynamic MI condition compared with the Control and both Slight movement conditions. In contrast, performing slight preparatory movements in isolation did not enhance serve performance. These findings suggest that combining imagery with congruent movements may facilitate motor preparation in young players, whereas movements performed without structured imagery may be insufficient to support performance gains. Overall, these results highlight the importance of explicitly guided dynamic MI when preparing the tennis serve in youth athletes.","manuscriptTitle":"Dynamic motor imagery but not pre-execution movements enhances serve tennis performance","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-03-16 19:55:56","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8967123/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-04T13:54:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-26T19:52:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-26T15:43:22+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"221581111992101645719405804773318322454","date":"2026-03-17T11:16:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"200679192750759831487933652938314626115","date":"2026-03-13T11:40:16+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-12T07:17:57+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-02-26T09:26:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-02-26T03:41:20+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Psychological Research","date":"2026-02-25T11:09:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"psychological-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"prpf","sideBox":"Learn more about [Psychological Research](http://link.springer.com/journal/426)","snPcode":"426","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/426/3","title":"Psychological Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"b8138ba2-488d-4cf0-b3d2-fadc6839d3f4","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 16th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-04T13:54:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"in-revision","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-04T14:08:54+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-03-16 19:55:56","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8967123","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8967123","identity":"rs-8967123","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}