Flotation REST and archery: Norlander 1999 study

Twenty young Swedish archers (13 boys and 7 girls, mean age 15.75) shot four ends of three arrows at 18 metres after 45 minutes in a flotation tank, and on another occasion after 45 minutes sitting in an armchair reading newspapers. The two occasions were six weeks apart and the order was counterbalanced: half the group started with the tank, half with the armchair. Four national coaches had independently sorted the archers into three levels: seven least skilled, seven intermediate and six at elite standard.

The score did not change between conditions. The differences that remain are between levels: the least skilled scored 91.29 in the armchair condition and 77.86 after the tank, the intermediate group 105.57 and 99.71, the elite group 105.50 and 108.67, and the significant gap is the one between the least skilled and the other two groups. Looking at the spread across the four ends, after flotation the elite archers were more consistent (1.28) than the least skilled (3.43), whereas in the armchair condition the three groups were alike.

Perceived exertion after the twelve arrows was lower after flotation: 10.80 against 11.85 on the Borg scale, which runs from 6 to 20. Broken down by level, the difference sits entirely in the least skilled group (from 12.86 to 10.57); the elite archers were at 9.50 in both conditions. Activity in the extensor digitorum during the four ends was lower after flotation in the least skilled (from 17.00 to 13.12 per cent of maximal contraction) and in the elite group (from 15.48 to 13.70), while in the intermediate group it rose. Tension in the last tenths of a second before release did not change in any group.

The experiment ran over two weekends at the Olympic Support Centre in Örebro, Sweden, six weeks apart, with archers recruited through the Swedish archery federation. Five shot compound, three the classical bow and twelve the so-called freestyle bow; two were left-handed. Only one had tried flotation before, nine had some experience of mental training.

The tank (2,400 by 1,260 by 950 millimetres) was insulated from sound and light, with water held at 34.2 degrees and saturated with magnesium sulphate to a density of 1.3 grams per cubic centimetre, enough to float without moving. Before entering, each archer was given a progressive relaxation instruction running from the toes to the face, with a word to hold in mind on each breath, and wax plugs for the ears. After 45 minutes they showered, put on a tracksuit and went to the shooting hall, where they were told that full competition status applied. In the control condition they spent the same 45 minutes in an armchair reading newspapers.

Shooting was at 18 metres on a regulation 40 cm face, four ends of three arrows, at most 120 seconds per end, for 120 points available in all. An electromyograph recorded the extensor digitorum of the drawing forearm (the left arm for the two left-handers), chosen because it is the antagonist of the flexor and is held to need to stay as relaxed as possible; values are expressed as a percentage of each archer's maximal voluntary contraction, both as a mean over the four ends and as a mean in the 0.1 to 0.5 seconds before each release. After every arrow the archer rated the experience on a five-point scale, and after the four ends gave a perceived exertion rating on the Borg scale. The analysis uses analysis of covariance with level as the between-group factor, adjusting for a difference in lunch habits that emerged between the three groups, plus Wilcoxon tests within each group.

The authors acknowledge two limitations: the sample is small, and the flotation condition included, for a couple of minutes, a progressive relaxation instruction that the armchair condition did not have. So the two conditions differ by more than the floating. To these can be added that nobody could be unaware of which condition they were in, that the tank was new to nineteen of the twenty archers, and that perceived exertion and the five-point rating measure how an archer feels rather than what they do.

The title speaks of primary process, a more imaginative and less verbal mental state, but that state was not measured in this experiment: the authors infer it from other work of their own. Skill level, the only factor that produces differences in score, comes from the judgement of four coaches, who agreed with each other but did not use a performance measure; the groups of six or seven are small, and the within-group comparisons rest on tests over seven or six pairs of values. Bow type influenced pre-release tension, with compound lower than freestyle, and the three types were unevenly distributed.

The score covers twelve arrows at 18 metres, which is little on which to see a small difference, and the most curious finding is left unexplained: the least skilled archers lost on average 13 points out of 120 after flotation, with almost twice the spread, and none of the analyses pursues this beyond noting that the difference between conditions is not significant. Consistency is likewise computed as the standard deviation across four ends per person, which is very few data points. The study dates from 1999, with only a handful of later citations recorded in the copy consulted, and there is no longitudinal follow-up, which the authors themselves name as the step needed.

Forty-five minutes in a flotation tank immediately before shooting did not change the score of these young archers. It changed two other things: how tired they said they felt after twelve arrows, which was lower after flotation, and tension in the extensor digitorum while shooting, which was lower in the least skilled and the elite archers. Tension in the last half second before release, the moment at which a stiff hand is paid for, was identical.

For an archer this is a picture of relaxation that can be felt but does not reach the target, at least in a single session. The authors read it the same way and suggest that seeing an effect on score would require training in the state the tank induces rather than merely passing through it before a test; they also propose combining flotation with visualisation, but that is a proposal, not a finding of this experiment.

One result deserves attention from anyone teaching beginners: the seven least skilled archers lost points after flotation and became more erratic, while the six elite archers stayed where they were and shot their four ends more alike. The difference between conditions is not significant and the sample is tiny, so it cannot be said that deep relaxation harms beginners. What can be said is that in this experiment the gains in consistency appeared only at the top.