Despite recent advancements in sport
sciences and technology across professional boundaries through research, educationand training, it is
remarkable that sport psychology consultants have not fully tapped into recent
scientific and technological perspectives. This mini review
gives brief insights on useful applications such as virtual reality (VR),
augmented reality (AR), eye tracking, electroencephalography (EEG), and functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). These scientific methods could be employedto
improve the cognitive functioningand athletes’ performance, and serveas diagnostic
and training tools for consultancy work.

Keywords: Neurocognition,
Eye Tracking, Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, Consulting

Introduction

Over the past two decades, research and professional debates have
raged on which approaches in sport psychology consulting would make the most
significant contributions towardathletes’ and other clients’ life by creating a
lasting positive behavior change 1,2.Consequently, some researchers and sport
psychology consultants have expressed reservations about the lack of scientific
evidence-based interventions that underpin psychological processes in sport 3.
The quest for improving sport psychology consulting has proved daunting for
researchers and consultants due to the wide array of issues confronting
professional practice on roles and services (e.g., performance enhancement,
psychological skills training, counseling delivery) they provide 4.

Despite the significant progress in recognizing the features and
attributes necessary for improved consulting from the athletes’, team and
coaches’ perspectives over the years, researchers and consultants are still
searching for effective approaches that may enhance theadvancement of
scientific knowledge, skills and techniques needed to meet their clients’ needs1,5.
To date, contemporary intervention models have conventionally focused on two
approaches: the effectiveness of methods and interventions used in service
delivery 3,6, and the behavior and training experiences of athletes, and
ethics of sport psychologists 7,8. Though these cognitive-behavioral models
havebeen significant in professional practice, there has been strong advocacy foralternate
paradigms in the field9.

The fundamental question is what constitutes acceptable
“science” in sport psychology delivery? Current sport psychology
delivery has been based on subjective judgments and assessments, and generally
operates on intuitive basis instead of producing objectified data, actualized
data from validated hypotheses, hypotheses supported by theorems, and theorems
articulated from theories3. These valued processes provide objectification of
knowledge, skills and attitudes that may shape service delivery through the
outline of well-defined scientific procedures. Therefore, current practice is
based on subjective experiences, intuition, and observations from inadequate
samples,
thus may not provide viable knowledge for effective
interventions; calling for more dynamic approaches toservice delivery.
According to Strean& Roberts 3, these procedures and methods lack
critical examination and that professionals are not fully aware of the
effectiveness of many procedures they use. To move the sport psychology field
forward, researchers and psychologists ought to empirically show the effectiveness
of their interventions. By conscientiously assessing what they do rather than
assume, findings and its’ related interventions would be well established.

Despite
recent advancements in sport sciences and technology across professional
boundaries through research, education and training, it is surprising the sport
psychology consultants have not fully tapped into recent scientific
perspectives (e.g., virtual reality VR, augmented reality AR, eye tracking
ET, mental representations MR, electroencephalography
EEG, and
functional magnetic resonance imaging fMRI to
promote the field 10. For instance, VR and AR could be used to determine
perceptual and/or auditory information as supplementary sources of feedback for
motor learning. Data from athletes are accessed from
multisensory components, audio-visual aids, actuators (types of motors used for
moving or controlling mechanisms), and virtual actors. These measurements are
recorded at different rates and synchronized to provide useful information on
athletes’ movements.