Motor Imagery and Visualization in Youth Sport: Evidence Review and Practical Guidance for Parents and Athletes Aged 11–18 Years

Ori Scott, M.Sc., RDIndependent Nutrition and Sport ProfessionalHealthy Habits Simplyhttps://www.healthyhabitssimply.com/Email: orialexscott@gmail.comTel: +1 908-476-0365

Affiliation: Independent

Abstract

Background

Mental imagery, frequently referred to in sport as visualization or mental rehearsal, involves mentally representing a movement, sporting situation, strategy, emotional response, or performance without physically executing the complete action. Contemporary sport psychology increasingly conceptualizes effective imagery as a multisensory process rather than simply “seeing” a successful performance. Although imagery training has been extensively investigated in adults, its application to children and adolescents requires developmental consideration because imagery ability, attentional capacity, cognitive control, sporting experience, and understanding of internal bodily sensations continue to mature across childhood and adolescence.

Objective

This narrative evidence review evaluates the scientific literature concerning motor imagery and visualization in young athletes and translates the evidence into practical guidance for parents and athletes aged approximately 11–18 years. Particular attention is given to motor-performance outcomes, developmental considerations, intervention structure, the PETTLEP framework, parental behavior, and safety.

Methods

Priority was given to PubMed/MEDLINE-indexed systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized or controlled studies involving children and adolescents, and established professional guidance from the Association for Applied Sport Psychology. Recent evidence syntheses examining motor imagery in children and adolescents and imagery effects on athletic performance were given greatest weight. Parent recommendations were restricted to principles supported by published youth-sport parent research or established professional sport-psychology guidance. No evidence was identified supporting a single universally validated parent-administered imagery protocol for athletes aged 11–18 years.

Results

Research indicates that imagery training can improve motor performance in children and adolescents, although effect sizes and study quality vary considerably. A meta-analysis of imagery training in individuals aged 6–18 reported an overall medium positive effect on motor performance (Cohen's d approximately 0.49). A separate systematic review of 22 studies involving 934 participants aged 9–18 concluded that motor imagery combined with physical practice may have considerable potential, although the certainty of evidence was rated low because of methodological limitations and heterogeneity. Recent athlete-specific meta-analytic research in predominantly older athletic populations likewise indicates positive effects of structured imagery practice.

Youth studies provide evidence that imagery use develops with age and sporting experience. Young athletes report using imagery during both training and competition for skill-related and motivational purposes. PETTLEP-based interventions—incorporating Physical, Environment, Task, Timing, Learning, Emotion, and Perspective characteristics of actual performance—represent one of the best-established frameworks for structuring motor imagery. However, individual youth trials have produced both positive and null findings, demonstrating that imagery should be regarded as an adjunct to physical practice rather than a substitute for it.

Parental behavior may substantially influence the environment in which mental skills are learned. Systematic review evidence supports autonomy-supportive parenting, moderate involvement, positive parent–child relationships, and a mastery-oriented climate emphasizing learning and effort. Directive pressure and excessive performance emphasis may contribute to anxiety.

Conclusions

Structured motor imagery can be incorporated into sport training for athletes aged 11–18 when developmentally appropriate, voluntary, realistic, individualized, and combined with physical training. Parents should facilitate rather than direct imagery practice, preserve athlete autonomy, emphasize learning rather than winning, and avoid using visualization as a test of commitment or a method of increasing performance pressure. Short, high-quality sessions centered on realistic sport actions are preferable to compulsory or excessively long practice.

Keywords: adolescent athlete; youth sport; visualization; imagery; motor imagery; mental practice; PETTLEP; sport psychology; parents; performance anxiety; mental skills.

1. Introduction

Psychological preparation is increasingly recognized as one component of comprehensive athlete development. Among commonly used psychological skills, mental imagery has received substantial scientific attention.

In sport, imagery is commonly called visualization, mental rehearsal, or mental practice. The term “visualization,” however, can be misleading because effective sport imagery is not limited to creating pictures. The Association for Applied Sport Psychology defines sport imagery as using sensory information to mentally rehearse sporting experiences and recommends incorporating sight, bodily sensations, sounds, and other relevant sensory details. Effective imagery is generally vivid, detailed, realistic in timing, and related directly to the athlete's performance needs.

Motor imagery can be defined more specifically as the mental simulation of an action without overt execution of that action. Developmental literature indicates that children can engage in motor imagery, but imagery ability develops progressively and varies markedly between individuals.

This developmental variability is particularly relevant to youth sport. A technique that is effective for an experienced 17-year-old athlete cannot automatically be transferred unchanged to an 11-year-old beginner. Appropriate implementation must consider chronological age, biological and cognitive development, sporting experience, imagery ability, attention span, emotional state, and personal preference.

2. Current Scientific Evidence

2.1 Evidence from children and adolescents

One of the most comprehensive systematic reviews specifically examining motor imagery training in children and adolescents included 22 studies involving 934 participants aged 9–18 years. The investigators concluded that motor imagery combined with physical practice appeared promising for motor learning. However, risk of bias ranged from “some concerns” to high, and the overall GRADE certainty was considered low. The authors therefore emphasized the need for standardized assessment, introductory imagery instruction, regular engagement checks, and detailed reporting using PETTLEP, TIDieR, and CONSORT principles.

A subsequent meta-analysis concentrating on healthy children and adolescents aged 6–18 years included 19 studies and 110 effect sizes. The pooled result showed an overall medium positive effect, Cohen's d = 0.494, 95% CI 0.287–0.701, supporting an effect of imagery training on motor performance. The authors nevertheless emphasized continuing uncertainty concerning optimal age, dose, task characteristics, and developmental moderators.

These findings support imagery as a legitimate motor-learning strategy but do not justify presenting it as universally effective.

2.2 Evidence from athletes more broadly

A 2025 systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis evaluated 86 studies involving 3,593 athletes and concluded that imagery practice produced beneficial effects across several athletic-performance outcomes. The analysis also suggested that imagery combined with additional psychological skills training may outperform imagery alone. Approximately 10-minute sessions performed three times weekly emerged as a potentially effective dose in moderator analyses, although these findings were derived from a heterogeneous athlete literature and should not be treated as a pediatric prescription.

A 2026 systematic review of randomized studies examining motor imagery and action observation included nine studies and 339 participants. Eight studies demonstrated improvements in at least some athletic-performance variables, but no definitive optimal intervention protocol could be established.

Accordingly, the general athlete literature supports imagery, but the exact dose-response relationship in 11–18-year-olds remains insufficiently established.

3. What Do Young Athletes Naturally Imagine?

Research involving young athletes demonstrates that imagery is not limited to adult or elite competitors.

In a developmental study involving 110 young athletes aged 7–14, participants across age groups reported imagery use in both training and competition and for both cognitive and motivational purposes. The ways athletes used imagery changed with development, supporting age-sensitive rather than uniform instruction.

Competitive athletes aged 8–13 have also demonstrated stronger mental-imagery skills than age-matched non-athletes, although such cross-sectional findings cannot establish whether sport improves imagery ability, children with better imagery abilities are attracted to sport, or both processes occur.

Research comparing internal and external visual imagery further indicates differences according to sport type and skill level. Consequently, there is no scientific basis for insisting that every young athlete use one imagery perspective.

4. Imagery Should Supplement—not Replace—Physical Practice

The strongest practical interpretation of the literature is that imagery works best as a supplement to physical training.

In beginner male volleyball players averaging 13.5 years of age, athletes were randomized to physical practice plus PETTLEP imagery, physical practice plus traditional imagery, or physical practice alone. Imagery was performed for approximately 15 minutes three times weekly for seven weeks. Although all groups improved, the PETTLEP-plus-physical-practice group improved significantly more than the other conditions.

Other pediatric research has not always reproduced such benefits. A five-week PETTLEP intervention in young futsal players did not significantly improve imagery ability or soccer-task performance. The investigators also observed age-related relationships with some imagery abilities, emphasizing developmental variability.

These contrasting findings illustrate an important scientific principle:

Imagery is a potentially useful training tool, not a guaranteed performance enhancer.

5. PETTLEP: The Best-Established Framework for Sport Motor Imagery

One influential framework for structuring imagery is PETTLEP.

The acronym represents:

Component	Meaning	Youth-sport application
P – Physical	Match relevant physical sensations and posture	Athlete may stand in a normal ready position or hold familiar equipment when safe
E – Environment	Reproduce the performance environment	Imagine the court, pool, track, field, gym, crowd, lighting, or starting area
T – Task	Rehearse the actual sport task	Imagine the specific serve, shot, turn, start, routine, pass, race phase, etc.
T – Timing	Mental action resembles actual timing	Perform imagery approximately in real time rather than unnaturally fast
L – Learning	Script changes as skill develops	Update imagery when technique or strategy changes
E – Emotion	Include realistic competition emotions	Recognize excitement or nerves while imaging effective responses
P – Perspective	Use an appropriate visual/kinesthetic viewpoint	Internal, external, or mixed perspective depending on athlete and task

PETTLEP was developed to make imagery more functionally similar to actual execution, and reviews continue to support its relevance in sport.

Importantly, PETTLEP is a framework rather than a rigid script. Personal relevance and adaptation are emphasized.

6. Evidence-Informed Guidance for Parents

Important Scientific Qualification

No universally accepted, validated parent-administered visualization protocol specifically for 11–18-year-old athletes was identified in the reviewed literature.

The following parent recommendations therefore represent a practical translation of:

1. pediatric imagery research;

2. PETTLEP principles;

3. systematic research concerning parenting in youth sport; and

4. established AASP parent and imagery guidance.

They should not be described as a validated therapeutic protocol.

7. The Parent's Role: Facilitator, Not Mental-Performance Coach

Systematic research examining 29 studies including more than 9,000 young athletes found that favorable parental influences included:

• autonomy-supportive parenting;

• moderate rather than excessive involvement;

• positive parent–child relationships;

• positive goals and values; and

• a task/mastery-oriented motivational climate.

Research also indicates that directive behavior and perceived parental pressure may be associated with greater precompetition anxiety in young athletes.

AASP parent guidance similarly recommends allowing young athletes to make mistakes, supporting their sporting choices, asking whether they want feedback before giving it, and avoiding perfectionistic expectations or excessive pushing.

Therefore:

The parent should create the conditions for imagery practice, but the athlete should own the imagery.

8. Practical Parent–Child Imagery Routine

Step 1 — Ask permission

The parent begins with:

“Would you like to do a short mental rehearsal?”

If the athlete says no, the session ends.

Imagery should not become:

• punishment;

• mandatory homework after a poor performance;

• evidence that the child is “serious enough”;

• a parent-controlled correction session.

Athlete autonomy is particularly important during adolescence.

Step 2 — Select one controllable objective

Choose one task.

Good examples include:

• tennis serve;

• basketball free throw;

• soccer first touch;

• swimming start;

• gymnastics sequence;

• sprint start;

• volleyball pass;

• skating transition;

• returning attention after an error;

• executing a planned tactical decision.

Avoid vague goals such as:

“Imagine yourself winning.”

Outcome imagery can be motivational, but skill development is better served by mentally rehearsing behaviors that the athlete can control.

Step 3 — Establish the scene

Ask the athlete to notice a small number of realistic details:

Where are you?

What can you see?

What can you hear?

What does your body feel like?

The AASP recommends vivid, detailed, multisensory imagery that resembles the actual sporting environment.

For younger athletes, two or three sensory cues may be sufficient.

9. Use Real-Time Imagery

The athlete mentally executes the movement at approximately the same speed as actual performance.

If a sporting sequence normally takes eight seconds, the mental execution should generally approximate eight seconds.

This principle is consistent with both PETTLEP and established imagery guidance.

10. Include Kinesthetic Sensations

Visualization should not involve vision alone.

Where possible, the athlete can notice:

• foot pressure;

• balance;

• muscular tension;

• acceleration;

• racket or ball contact;

• breathing;

• body rotation;

• rhythm.

However, children differ considerably in kinesthetic imagery ability, and younger athletes may find bodily imagery more difficult than visual imagery.

Parents should therefore invite sensations rather than demand them.

11. Mentally Rehearse Coping, Not Perfection

Imagery should not teach the athlete that a successful competitor never makes mistakes.

A more realistic script may include:

1. beginning confidently;

2. encountering a manageable distraction or error;

3. noticing the emotional response;

4. using a breathing, attentional, or self-talk cue;

5. returning to the task;

6. executing the next action effectively.

This approach emphasizes controllable responses and resilience rather than fantasy-based perfection.

AASP specifically recommends using imagery to rehearse maintaining focus despite distractions and managing conditions that normally create competitive nervousness.

12. Recommended Session Structure

Because the pediatric literature has not established one optimal dose, practice should remain conservative.

Ages approximately 11–13

Start with approximately:

2–5 minutes

Use:

• one skill;

• one or two sensory cues;

• simple language;

• several repetitions;

• optional video or demonstration before imagery.

Do not force prolonged concentration.

Ages approximately 14–15

Approximately:

3–7 minutes

Introduce:

• more sensory information;

• competition situations;

• coping after mistakes;

• strategic imagery.

Ages approximately 16–18

Approximately:

5–10 minutes

More experienced adolescents may tolerate:

• full PETTLEP scripts;

• tactical sequences;

• pressure scenarios;

• precompetition routines;

• imagery combined with self-talk or breathing.

These ranges are practical conservative starting ranges, not experimentally established pediatric dosage standards.

Adult/mixed-athlete meta-analysis suggests approximately 10 minutes three times per week may be effective, but extrapolation to younger athletes should be made cautiously.

13. Frequency

A practical target is:

2–3 structured sessions per week initially, integrated into normal training.

Brief preperformance imagery may additionally occur immediately before a skill or competition routine.

Research in adolescent volleyball has successfully used three sessions weekly, and broader athlete meta-analysis also identifies approximately three weekly sessions as potentially effective.

However, more practice should not automatically be assumed to be better.

14. A 5-Minute Parent–Child Example

0:00–0:30 — Settle

Athlete chooses a comfortable position.

One or two slow breaths may be used if the athlete prefers.

Relaxation is not a mandatory requirement for motor imagery.

0:30–1:00 — Choose the task

Example:

“Today I'm rehearsing my serve.”

1:00–2:00 — Build the setting

Notice:

• court;

• racket;

• ball;

• opponent;

• sounds;

• body position.

2:00–4:00 — Mental repetitions

Perform three to five realistic repetitions.

Imagine:

• preparation;

• movement;

• contact;

• follow-through;

• recovery.

4:00–4:30 — Add one challenge

Imagine:

• crowd noise;

• important point;

• previous mistake;

• nervous feeling.

Then rehearse the athlete's planned response.

4:30–5:00 — Athlete evaluation

Parent asks:

“What part felt easiest to imagine?”

“What would you change next time?”

The parent does not grade the imagery.

15. Example: Tennis

Instead of:

“Imagine beating your opponent.”

Use:

“See the court from your normal position. Feel the racket in your hand. Bounce the ball as you normally do. Notice your breathing. Begin your service motion at normal speed. Feel the weight shift and racket acceleration. See the intended target. Complete the serve and recover into your ready position.”

For pressure practice:

“Now imagine the score is close. You notice some nervousness. You use your normal breathing cue, return your attention to your target, and perform the same routine.”

16. Example: Soccer

The athlete imagines:

• receiving a pass;

• checking space before receiving;

• body orientation;

• first touch;

• defender pressure;

• selecting the next pass;

• immediately returning attention after an error.

The objective is not simply to imagine scoring.

It is to rehearse perception, decision making, movement, and response.

17. Example: Swimming

The athlete may rehearse:

• approach to the block;

• starting stance;

• starter sound;

• explosive extension;

• water entry;

• streamline;

• breakout;

• rhythm.

If race anxiety is relevant, the athlete can incorporate realistic pre-race activation while mentally practicing an effective response.

18. Internal vs External Perspective

Internal imagery

The athlete experiences the action approximately through their own eyes.

This can be useful for:

• timing;

• bodily sensations;

• attentional cues;

• decision making.

External imagery

The athlete imagines watching themselves from outside, somewhat like observing a video.

This can be useful for:

• body positioning;

• technique;

• movement form;

• complex routines.

Research in young athletes suggests imagery ability varies according to perspective, skill level, and sport.

Therefore, parents should not say:

“You must see it through your own eyes.”

Instead ask:

“Which way helps you understand the movement better?”

19. Video Plus Imagery

Action observation may complement imagery.

In rhythmic gymnasts, video observation combined with PETTLEP mental training and physical practice improved jumping outcomes compared with physical training alone.

A parent may therefore occasionally use a technically appropriate video recommended by the coach, followed by short athlete-led imagery.

However, video should reinforce the coach's technical model rather than create competing technical instructions.

20. Parent Communication Before Competition

Parents should avoid introducing new technique immediately before competition.

Useful parent behavior includes:

“Do you want your short mental rehearsal?”

“What is your cue today?”

“Have fun and compete.”

Avoid:

“Visualize winning.”

“You have to believe you're going to win.”

“Don't mess up the start.”

“Remember everything I told you.”

The difference is that the first set supports autonomy and task focus; the second may increase outcome pressure and cognitive load.

21. Parent Communication After Competition

Do not immediately conduct a technical or psychological debrief unless the athlete requests it.

AASP recommends allowing athletes to make mistakes and asking whether they want feedback before giving it.

Later, an appropriate reflection may include:

What worked?

What did you learn?

What situation might be useful to rehearse before next time?

This maintains imagery as a learning tool rather than a correction imposed by the parent.

22. Imagery and Performance Anxiety

Performance anxiety in young athletes may involve cognitive, emotional, somatic, and behavioral symptoms. Contemporary clinical literature identifies cognitive behavioral approaches as the best-established psychological treatment when performance anxiety becomes clinically significant.

Imagery may be incorporated within performance preparation, but it should not replace appropriate psychological assessment or treatment.

Parents should seek qualified assistance when anxiety produces:

• repeated avoidance of training or competition;

• panic-like symptoms;

• persistent sleep disturbance;

• significant school impairment;

• marked emotional distress;

• prolonged loss of enjoyment;

• persistent fear of failure;

• compulsive training behaviors;

• substantial changes in eating;

• self-harm thoughts or behaviors.

A Certified Mental Performance Consultant or appropriately qualified licensed mental-health professional can provide individualized support. AASP describes imagery, competition routines, self-talk, goal setting, and related interventions as part of qualified mental-performance practice.

23. What Parents Should Not Do

Parents should not:

1. force imagery when the athlete does not want it;

2. repeatedly tell the athlete exactly what they must imagine;

3. use visualization to guarantee victory;

4. present imagery as magical thinking;

5. substitute mental practice for physical skill development;

6. reinforce technical instructions that conflict with the coach;

7. conduct prolonged sessions with a fatigued athlete;

8. insist that imagery must always be perfectly positive;

9. criticize a child's inability to create vivid images;

10. treat poor imagery as evidence of weak motivation;

11. use mental rehearsal to increase specialization or excessive training;

12. use visualization alone to manage significant anxiety or psychological illness.

24. A Simple Parent Checklist

Before the session, the parent asks:

Did my child choose to practice?

Are we rehearsing one specific skill or situation?

Is the imagery consistent with the coach's technical instruction?

During the session:

Is the action happening realistically?

Is my child using whichever senses are natural?

Is the imagery approximately real-time?

Am I allowing my child to control the experience?

Afterward:

Did I ask rather than judge?

Did we keep the session brief?

Did my child finish feeling capable rather than pressured?

25. Evidence Classification for Parents

Recommendation	Evidence interpretation
Imagery may enhance motor performance	Supported by systematic review/meta-analysis
Combine imagery with physical practice	Supported and preferable to replacing physical practice
Make imagery task-specific and realistic	Supported by PETTLEP literature and professional guidance
Include several sensory modalities when useful	Supported by imagery theory/professional guidance
Use real-time imagery	Consistent with PETTLEP and applied guidance
Adapt practice to developmental level	Strongly supported by developmental literature
Let the athlete participate in constructing imagery	Consistent with youth-development and autonomy-support literature
Parents should emphasize learning and autonomy	Supported by systematic parent/youth-sport research
Approximately 10 min × 3/week is optimal for every youth athlete	Not established
Visualization guarantees improved competition performance	Not supported
Parents should act as sport psychologists	Not supported
Imagery can replace treatment of clinically significant anxiety	Not supported

26. Discussion

The available literature supports mental imagery as a potentially valuable component of youth athlete development, but the strength of the evidence must not be overstated.

Three conclusions are particularly defensible.

First, imagery can enhance motor performance during childhood and adolescence. Meta-analytic evidence demonstrates a moderate average benefit, although substantial between-study heterogeneity exists.

Second, imagery appears most rational when integrated with physical practice. Physical execution remains necessary for acquiring strength, coordination, perceptual information, timing, fatigue tolerance, and sport-specific experience. Imagery is an additional cognitive rehearsal method rather than a replacement for training.

Third, youth implementation requires developmental adaptation. Imagery is not one uniform cognitive skill. Visual, kinesthetic, internal, and external imagery abilities may develop differently, and sporting experience influences imagery competence.

The parent's role should similarly be developmentally appropriate. Parents are influential social agents in youth sport, and a systematic review demonstrates that positive motivational outcomes are associated with autonomy support, appropriate levels of involvement, positive relationships, and mastery-oriented behavior.

Consequently, parent-supported imagery should reinforce autonomy rather than control.

27. Limitations of the Evidence

Several limitations must be acknowledged.

Many pediatric motor-imagery studies involve small samples.

Intervention design varies considerably across:

• session length;

• frequency;

• total intervention duration;

• sporting task;

• imagery perspective;

• instruction style;

• athlete experience;

• age.

Some studies involve healthy non-athletes or clinical populations rather than competitive athletes.

Risk of bias is frequently moderate or high, and systematic reviewers have rated certainty of pediatric evidence as low in several domains.

Evidence is especially insufficient to establish:

• one optimal imagery dose for ages 11–18;

• one optimal imagery perspective;

• whether benefits differ reliably by sex;

• whether younger and older adolescents require substantially different training doses;

• a validated parent-led imagery protocol;

• long-term effects on competition success.

Recent broad athlete meta-analysis is encouraging but should not be automatically generalized to children.

28. Practical Clinical and Coaching Implications

Imagery is most appropriately introduced as a learnable psychological skill.

For a young athlete:

Physical training develops the movement.

Imagery rehearses the movement and the response to sporting situations.

The coach protects technical consistency.

The athlete owns the mental rehearsal.

The parent's role is to support autonomy, confidence, learning, and perspective.

Where mental-performance problems exceed ordinary competitive nervousness, qualified psychological or mental-performance professionals should become involved.

29. Conclusions

The current scientific literature supports developmentally appropriate motor imagery as an adjunct to physical practice in young athletes.

Children and adolescents are capable of using imagery, but their abilities and preferred strategies vary with age, development, sporting experience, task, and individual characteristics. Meta-analytic evidence indicates a meaningful average positive effect of imagery training on motor performance in children and adolescents, although study quality and heterogeneity limit certainty.

PETTLEP provides a useful existing framework for designing realistic sport imagery. Its principles—Physical, Environment, Task, Timing, Learning, Emotion, and Perspective—can be translated into youth sport when kept simple, individualized, and developmentally appropriate.

Parents can support this process, but the scientific literature does not justify treating parents as substitute sport psychologists or presenting a parent-administered imagery routine as a validated clinical protocol.

The most defensible parent approach is therefore:

Ask rather than command.

Facilitate rather than control.

Practice skills rather than fantasizing only about outcomes.

Rehearse coping as well as successful execution.

Keep imagery realistic and developmentally appropriate.

Combine imagery with physical practice.

Emphasize mastery, learning, enjoyment, and autonomy rather than winning.

In young athletes, visualization should ultimately help the child learn to control what is controllable—not convince the child that performance determines personal worth.

References

1. Liu Y, Zhao S, Zhang X, et al. The Effects of Imagery Practice on Athletes' Performance: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis with Systematic Review. Behav Sci (Basel). 2025;15(5):685. doi:10.3390/bs15050685. PMID: 40426460.

2. Effect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PubMed PMID: 34574389.

3. Guilbert J, Fernandez J. Best practice for improving children's and adolescents' sport skills with motor imagery. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Published online December 6, 2023. doi:10.1080/1750984X.2023.2289124.

4. Imagery training of motor actions in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology. doi:10.1080/1750984X.2023.2167225.

5. Yazgan EA, Kara Kaya B, Tiryaki P, Atlı E, Cavlak U. Effectiveness of Motor Imagery and Action Observation in Parameters of Sport Performance: A Systematic Review. Percept Mot Skills. 2026;133(1):224–249. doi:10.1177/00315125251359760. PMID: 40659534.

6. Munroe-Chandler KJ, et al. Where, when, and why young athletes use imagery: an examination of developmental differences. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. PMID: 17479579. doi:10.1080/02701367.2007.10599408.

7. Mental Imagery Skills in Competitive Young Athletes and Non-athletes. Front Psychol. 2020. PMID: 32362857. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00633.

8. Imagery perspective among young athletes: Differentiation between external and internal visual imagery. PMID: 30356512. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2014.12.008.

9. Afrouzeh M, Sohrabi E, Haghkhan A, Rowshani F, Goharrokhi S. Effectiveness of PETTLEP imagery on performance of passing skill in volleyball. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2015;55(1–2):30–36. PMID: 25642682.

10. Quinton ML, Cumming J, Gray R, et al. A PETTLEP Imagery Intervention with Young Athletes. Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity. 2014;9(1):47–59. doi:10.1515/jirspa-2014-0003.

11. The future for PETTLEP: a modern perspective on an effective and established tool. PMID: 28813334. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.007.

12. Best practice for motor imagery: a systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. PMID: 21682867.

13. Battaglia C, et al. Use of video observation and motor imagery on jumping performance in national rhythmic gymnastics athletes. Human Movement Science. 2014;38:225–234. PMID: 25457420. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2014.10.001.

14. The role of parents in the motivation of young athletes: a systematic review. PMID: 38259527.

15. The effects of interpersonal development programmes with sport coaches and parents on youth athlete outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2023.102558. PMID: 37993028.

16. The influence of parenting practices and parental presence on children's and adolescents' pre-competitive anxiety. PMID: 19847683. doi:10.1080/02640410903062001.

17. Beenen KT, Vosters JA, Patel DR. Sport-related performance anxiety in young athletes: a clinical practice review. 2025;14(1):127–138. PMID: 39944878. doi:10.21037/tp-24-258.

18. Association for Applied Sport Psychology. Sport Imagery Training. Jennifer Cumming, PhD. AASP professional educational resource.

19. Association for Applied Sport Psychology. Do's and Don'ts for Parents of Young Athletes. Kay Porter, PhD. AASP professional educational resource.

20. Association for Applied Sport Psychology. Certified Mental Performance Consultant® Program and Scope of Mental Performance Practice. AASP.

Author Note

Ori Scott, M.Sc., RD is an independent nutrition and sport professional. This manuscript is intended for scientific and educational purposes. It does not constitute individualized psychological diagnosis or treatment.

Correspondence:Ori Scott, M.Sc., RDIndependentEmail: orialexscott@gmail.comWebsite: https://www.healthyhabitssimply.com/Telephone: +1 908-476-0365

Conflict of Interest Statement

No financial, professional, or commercial conflicts of interest .

Funding Statement

No external funding was received for the preparation of this manuscript.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable.