The Evidence on Teaching

Does mental practice still enhance performance? A 24-year follow-up and meta-analytic replication and extension

Toth, A. J., McNeill, E., Hayes, K., Moran, A. P., & Campbell, M. · 2020

grade Creplicationdeveloper-involvedreplicated
Population
37 studies, 115 effects; mixed adult samples across sport, skill and lab tasks
Design
Methodological replication of Driskell et al. (1994) applied to 37 studies published 1995-2018 yielding 115 effect sizes, framed around contemporary reproducibility concerns. Same MP-vs-control logic; tasks span lab and sport-specific. Co-authored by Moran (author of the 1994 original), so not adversarial.
Key findings
Mental practice survives replication but shrinks: r=0.131 (d≈0.26) across 37 newer studies, roughly half Driskell's r=.255 — the familiar pattern of famous effects deflating as a literature matures. Still positive and significant. Moderated by duration (1-6 weeks best), externally vs internally cued tasks, and imagery type. Most outcomes are post-intervention performance, not delayed retention or transfer.
Replication notes
Successful directional replication of Driskell 1994 at roughly half the magnitude.

Effects

OutcomeMetricValueMeasureTimingVsHorizonClass
Mental practice vs control, overallcorrelation r (≈ d 0.26)r = 0.131 — about HALF the 1994 estimate (r = .255)mixedmostly acquisition/immediate post-test; lab and field mixbusiness-as-usualend-of-treatmentdomain-skill
Programme-duration moderatorr by programme lengthStrongest for programmes lasting 1-6 weeksmixedacquisition; mixedbusiness-as-usualend-of-treatmentdomain-skill
Task-type moderatorr by cue typeStronger for externally cued than internally cued movement tasksmixedacquisition; mixedbusiness-as-usualend-of-treatmentdomain-skill
Imagery-type moderatorr by imagery modalitySignificant moderator (visual vs kinesthetic distinctions matter)mixedacquisition; mixedbusiness-as-usualend-of-treatmentdomain-skill

Cited by