2012: 22: 6772 Scand J Med Sci Sports 2010 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01151.

& 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S

Efcacy of pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection in indoor sport climbing

X. Sanchez1, Ph. Lambert2,3, G. Jones4, D. J. Llewellyn5
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands, Institut des sciences humaines et sociales, Universite de Lie`ge, Lie`ge, Belgium, 3Institut de statistique, biostatistique et sciences actuarielles, Universite catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, 4Faculty of Health, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK, 5Peninsula Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
2 1

Corresponding author: Xavier Sanchez, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands. Tel: 131 50 363 6386, Fax: 131 50 363 4581, E-mail: x.sanchez@rug.nl
Accepted for publication 28 April 2010

Pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection (route preview) has been suggested as a key climbing performance parameter although its role has never been veried experimentally. We examined the ecacy of this perceptual-cognitive skill on indoor sport climbing performance. Twenty-nine male climbers, divided into intermediate, advanced and expert climbing level groups, climbed two indoor sport routes matching their climbing level and, where applicable, routes below their climbing level. At each level, one route was climbed with a preview, where participants beneted from a 3-min pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection. Performance was assessed in terms of output (route completion) and form (number and duration of moves and stops).

Route preview did not inuence the output performance. Climbers using visual inspection were no more likely to nish the ascent than those without the option of using visual inspection. Conversely, route preview did inuence form performance; climbers made fewer, and shorter stops during their ascent following a preview of the route. Form performances dierences remained when baseline ability levels were taken into account, although for shorter duration of stops only with expert climbers beneting most from route preview. The ability to visually inspect a climb before its ascent may represent an essential component of performance optimization.

Climbing is a popular recreational and sporting activity that occurs outdoor at clis and crags and indoors at purpose-built facilities, and that has dierent modalities, sub-disciplines and types of competition (Stiehl & Ramsey, 2005). Indoor sport climbing is a popular form of climbing with competitive events judged on the level of diculty climbed. The rst climbing World Cup event was held in 1989 and late in 2007, the International Federation of Sport Climbing was ocially recognized by the International Olympic Committee. As a competitive pursuit indoor sport climbing has triggered research interest regarding performancerelated determinants and training regimes. Recent studies have focused on physiological, kin/anthropometrical, injury and tness-related aspects of climbing (e.g., MacLeod et al., 2007; Jones et al., 2008; Espan a-Romero et al., 2009; Heyman et al., 2009; Backe et al., 2009). It has been suggested that variables of a psychological nature such as problemsolving ability, movement sequence recall, routending skills and anxiety may be crucial to successful

climbing performance (e.g., Watts, 2004; Giles et al., 2006). Although the psychological demands placed upon climber participants and the potential inuences on performance have been recently highlighted (Draper et al., 2008; Hodgson et al., 2009; Sanchez et al., 2010), the examination of performance-related psychological determinants remains scarce (Sheel, 2004; Morrison & Scho , 2007). The present study examined one of these key psychological factors: pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection (or route nding before climbing); hereafter, route preview. Route preview is thought to enhance climbing performance (Boschker et al., 2002; Sanchez & Torregrosa, 2005; Ferrand et al., 2006), as the ability to recall and visualize movement sequences may be paramount to climbing performance (Sanchez & Dauby, 2009). Boschker et al. (2002) suggested that route preview errors are a major reason for falling during climbing (p. 25). Interviewed climbers and coaches regarded route preview as crucial to optimize subsequent ascent performance (Sanchez & Torre-

67

Sanchez et al.
grosa, 2005). In addition, the role of route preview may be decisive when performing on-sight; this term describes an ascent characterized by visual inspection of the route before climbing, without prior physical rehearsal, and then ascent without falls (Fye & Peter, 1997). Such style of ascent is the standard protocol used at indoor sport climbing competitions whereby all climbers are allowed a time-constrained visual inspection of the route before ascent [International Federation of Sport Climbing (IFSC), 2009]. It has been reported, precisely, that the lack of climbing route knowledge, before performing in competition, is perceived as a handicap by elite climbers (Ferrand et al., 2006). Despite the suggested key role of route preview in sport climbing, its ecacy has not been addressed experimentally. Hence, the relationship between route preview and climbing performance, whether output (fall o the wall before route completion) or form (moves and stops), is largely unknown. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to determine whether route preview enhances indoor on-sight sport climbing performance. Past research within the sport domain (Fournier et al., 2008) has shown that mental images (i.e., what climbers will generate when route previewing) vary with the situation (e.g., before performing vs during performing) and according to the level of expertise. That is, what (content: e.g., visual, kinesthetic), how (characteristics: e.g., various speeds) and why (function: to learn vs to get motivated) mental images are imagined dierently from novice to experts (Fournier et al., 2008). The present research, therefore, incorporated sport climbers with a range of climbing abilities to account for expertise level and specically manipulated the route preview (route nding before climbing) in an ecologically valid indoor climbing setting to account for one given situation only (i.e., before performing an on-sight ascent). It was hypothesized that climbers with a higher level of ability would benet from route preview to a greater degree than climbers of a lower ability. Methods
Participants
Twenty-nine indoor male climbers provided informed consent to participate in the study. Climbers were divided into three ability groups following past research (Watts et al., 2003; ASc i et al., 2007; Draper et al., 2010): intermediate (n 5 9; ability ranging from 6a to 6b); advanced (n 5 9; ability ranging from 7a to 7a1); and expert (n 5 11; ability above 7b1). Current, rather than the highest attained, on-sight climbing ability was requested because an individuals climbing standard can vary throughout a single year. The grading system utilized in this study was the French Rating Scale of Diculty ` res et al., 1993), which is commonly used in (F-RSD) (Delignie mainland Europe (Fye & Peter, 1997). Health and safety measures and risk assessment regulations of the indoor climbing club where the study was carried out were followed. All participants were aliated to the club where the research was carried out and were insured against eventual accident or injury.

Climbing routes
Six routes of three dierent diculty levels, all identiable by color, were set on an articial indoor climbing wall by two professional certied route setters. They ensured that routes within the same level were of similar physicaltechnical diculty and that these were within the appropriate range to match the dierent groups climbing ability levels. The routes of an intermediate level of diculty [route intermediate level (RIL)] were rated as 6a (R1) and 6a1 (R2). The routes of an advanced level of diculty [route advanced level (RAL)] were both rated as 6c (R3 and R4). Finally, the routes of an expert level of diculty [route expert level (REL)] were rated as 7b (R5) and 7c (R6).

Procedures
Participants were invited to climb the two routes matching their climbing ability level and, where applicable, the routes below their own climbing ability level. Climbers in the intermediate group climbed two routes, those in the advanced group climbed four routes and the group of experts climbed all six routes. More precisely, the order of the route and the modality of climbing (with or without route preview) were randomly counterbalanced among participants, for each pair of routes. That is, each participant climbed, within each route diculty level, one route with route preview and the other without route preview. In addition, each route of each pair was climbed half of the times with route preview and the other half without route preview. Finally, one-half of the participants climbed routes with route preview rst, whereas the other half climbed routes without route preview rst. On-sight climbing modality characteristics were followed: climbers were not informed of the grade of diculty of the routes and were neither allowed to physically rehearse the routes before testing or see other climbers climbing the routes. Under the condition with route preview, similar to climbing competition rules, climbers were requested to visually inspect the route for a limited period of time (3 min), just before undertaking the climb (IFSC, 2009). Whereas, under the condition without route preview, the climbers started the ascent straight after being positioned in front of the climbing wall. Participants, who climbed one route only each testing day, were invited to warm-up in the way they normally do when attempting on-sight climbs. Participants warmed-up in the same way for each trial because they did not know beforehand which route they would climb neither they knew whether they would climb the route with or without route previewing. A standard warm-up was not used as it could have aected individual physiological and psychological preparation. Climbers were allowed to wear their own equipment (harness, shoes and chalk bag) and top ropes were used for both safety and legal reasons. Top roping is the pre-arrangement of a rope from above; the climber is, therefore, safeguarded from a fall while ascending, reducing the risk of injury. Participants climbed though without the aid from any rope tension.

Measurements
The method of frequency counting of static (number and duration of stops) and dynamic (explorative and performatory movements) actions was chosen to measure climbing

68

Route preview in climbing

performance (Flahaut & Loslever, 2000; Pijpers et al., 2005). The coding of form performance consisted of (a) the number and duration of the movements performed during the ascent of the route, and (b) the number of stops and their duration of use. With regard to the former, movements were coded either as performatory (necessary to ascent the route; release of a hold and contact made with another hold, used as support) or explorative (unnecessary to ascend the route; hold touched without being used as support). With regard to the latter, stops were coded as appropriate (resting points) or inappropriate (no resting points). Resting points, also known as aid points, are places on a climbing wall such as a combination of holds or a bolt, which are designed by route setters to be used by climbers to rest on (Fye & Peter, 1997). Performances were recorded using a digital movable video camera so as to obtain the best picture possible regardless of which of the six routes were to be taped. The setup provided a good view of climbing performances and walls (e.g., gather movements of hands and feet and dierentiate color of holds). Two independent researchers viewed the recorded performances and rated participants output and form performances. Agreement was reached in all cases before the nal coding.

Statistical analysis
One-way analysis of variance tests were carried out to assess whether the groups diered in age, body mass and height. Fishers exact tests of independence were carried out to analyze output performance. Two related-samples Wilcoxon rank tests with continuity correction were carried out to analyze form performance. Only data from climbers who reached the top of the two given routes in a same level were included for analysis (e.g., R1 and R2 at RIL). Signicance was preset at Po0.05.

and climbing without route preview (see Table 2). Precisely, route preview did not inuence the likelihood of the climber falling o the wall before reaching the top of the route, whether at RIL (P 5 0.55), RAL (P 5 0.83) or REL (P 5 1.0). At RIL (Table 3), 21 climbers successfully reached the top of both R1 and R2: three intermediate, seven advanced and 11 experts. For these successful climbers, if route preview were not to be eective, the distribution of the dierence between R1 and R2 would be the same (regardless of which route had been climbed with route preview). Analysis showed signicant reductions in the number and duration of stops when climbing with route preview (see Table 3). Signicant reductions remained when analysis considered climbers levels separately, for duration of stops (W 5 0; P 5 0.008) although not for number of stops (W 5 6; P 5 0.11), among expert climbers only. For duration of stops, descriptive were the following: Route 1 with route preview (RP) (24.2 19.78), Route 1 without RP (35.5 31.18), Route 2 with RP (35.7 21.18) and Route 2 without RP (63.6 21.29). For number of stops, descriptive were the following: Route 1 with RP (4.4 3.51), Route 1 without RP (6.0 3.79), Route 2 with RP (5.5 2.34) and Route 2 without RP (7.2 1.30). Note that, given the reduced number of participants successfully climbing both routes at either RAL or REL, no analyses were carried out for these two levels on process performance. In fact, only eight participants reached the top of both routes at RAL (three advanced and ve experts), whereas at REL, no climber succeeded in both routes.

Results No signicant dierences in participants age, body mass or height were found (see Table 1). Furthermore, there were no signicant dierences on output performance between climbing with route preview
Table 1. Participants age, body mass and height (mean SD)

Discussion The present study examined the ecacy of route preview upon climbing performance in an ecologi-

Intermediate (n 5 9) Age (years) Body mass (kg) Height (cm) 21 4.3 68 6.2 178 5.3

Advanced (n 5 9) 26 11.4 64 11.5 181 9.9

Expert (n 5 11) 24 5.8 67 7.9 177 10.4

F-value
0.86 0.45 0.51

P-value
0.43 0.64 0.60

Table 2. Number of participants output performances at intermediate, advanced and expert difculty level routes

With route preview Successful Routes intermediate level (n 5 29) Routes advanced level (n 5 20) Routes expert level (n 5 8)* 23 10 0 Unsuccessful 6 10 8

Without route preview Successful 22 9 1 Unsuccessful 7 11 7

*Three expert climbers missed testing on these routes due to injury.

69

Sanchez et al.
Table 3. Process performances (mean SD) of participants who successfully climbed the two routes of intermediate difculty (N 5 21)

Route 1 without RP Total ascent actions (F) Total ascent time (D) Performatory moves (F) Performatory moves (D) Exploratory moves (F) Exploratory moves (D) Appropriate stops (F) Appropriate stops (D) Inappropriate stops (F) Inappropriate stops (D) 74.3 7.6 125.9 20.4 72.6 7.0 121.9 17.4 1.6 1.7 4.0 5.3 5.9 3.0 33.7 18.8 0.00 0.00

Route 1 with RP 72.9 9.7 127.2 24.1 69.7 10.0 120.1 25.3 3.2 2.7 7.1 7.1 4.1 2.8 33.5 25.6 0.2 0.4 1.2 2.7

Route 2 without RP 77.3 6.5 144.6 36.1 72.5 4.6 132.8 25.0 4.8 4.7 11.8 15.5 6.6 1.7 66.2 39.7 0.8 1.3 4.6 10.6

Route 2 with RP 78.0 4.4 130.7 17.8 74.0 3.3 122.0 15.3 4.0 2.0 8.7 5.2 5.9 2.0 38.8 17.4 0.00 0.00

W-value
55.5 40.5 52.0 42.5 75.0 74.5 26.5 20.0 44.0 49.5

P-value
1.00 0.32 0.86 0.40 0.16 0.18 0.047* 0.015* 0.28 0.64

*Significant at Po0.05. RP, route preview; F, frequency (count); D, duration (s).

cally valid indoor climbing setting. Findings showed that route preview did not inuence output performance. Climbers using visual inspection were no more likely to nish the ascent than those without the option of using visual inspection. Conversely, route preview did inuence form performance; climbers made fewer, and shorter stops during their ascent following preview of the route. Moreover, experts beneted most from such a pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection. Precisely, form performances dierences remained when baseline ability levels were taken into account, although for shorter duration of stops only with expert climbers beneting most from route preview. Boschker et al. (2002) studied the relation between skill, perception and memory in sport climbing; they investigated the information picked up during route preview and the eect of expertise on that process. Their ndings showed dierences between novices and experts, the latter recalling more clustered information and focusing rather on the functional characteristics of the wall while the former not recalling such clustered information and mostly reporting the structural features of the holds. However, performances assessed were the participants climbing congurations reproductions, made on a reduced-scale model, and their behavior (gesture and verbal) while reproducing these congurations. Thus, no physical/actual climbing performance was examined. In our study, the experts may have outperformed on the climbing wall the rest of the participants for the same reason Boschker et al.s (2002) experts outperformed their non-experienced participants o the wall (i.e., in reproducing the climbing route on a reduced-scale model). Experts in our study might perform better because they take advantage of route preview by focusing on the functional aspects of the wall (linked climbing moves), rather than on its structural features, which is what novices predominantly do (see Boschker et al., 2002). Furthermore, it could be suggested that the expert level of route

preview skill indeed, matches, the expert level of overall skill climbing, as dened in previous research as being above 71 F-RSD (Watts et al., 2003; Watts, 2004; ASc i et al., 2007). Because the routes of intermediate diculty, which were the two that we examined in detail, were technically and physically climbable by all our participants, and because potential extraneous participant variables were excluded (e.g., body mass and height), the dierences observed in form performance between the experts (above 7b1 F-RSD) and the rest (below 7a1 F-RSD) of our climbers could fairly be attributed in our study to their dierent route preview skills. Although caution is still needed as other variables (not measured in our study) such as imagery ability and imagery practice may contribute to the participants route preview skill level (Cumming & Hall, 2002). Ripoll and colleagues studied the relationship between the semantic (understanding) and the sensorimotor (acting) visual functions in sport climbing (Dupuy & Ripoll, 1989; Ripoll, 1991; Dupuy et al., 1992). Climbers visual and motor behaviors were compared while climbing an unknown route (onsight) with climbing the same route well practiced (Dupuy et al., 1992), and while climbing two route sections with dierent handholds congurations (Dupuy & Ripoll, 1989). Their ndings showed that expert climbers were able to select the optimal climbing options to negotiate the route from their rst attempt while less expert climbers needed several successive trials to reach their optimal performance level (Ripoll, 1991). However, on-sight performances (routes rst attempt climb with no previous physical rehearsal) were compared with rehearsed performances (same route physically practiced) and/or these comparisons were made using dierent routes (dierent number of handholds). Thus, neither the same type of performance modality nor similar routes were examined. Interestingly, such form performance dierences between climbing with or without route preview

70

Route preview in climbing

found among our expert climbers are consistent with those observed by Dupuy and colleagues (Dupuy & Ripoll, 1989; Dupuy et al., 1992). They found that their expert climbers were able to select the optimal climbing options to negotiate the route from their rst attempt. Similar to our ndings, such better performances concerned mainly body immobilizations (resting points in our study), whereas their body displacement (performatory moves in our study) remained unchanged (Dupuy et al., 1992). Moreover, when comparisons were made using two route sections with dierent handhold congurations (Dupuy & Ripoll, 1989), a similar pattern was found. That is, reductions concerned only resting points whereas the duration of phases of body displacement and number of displacements remained unchanged (Ripoll, 1991). Such reductions in resting points, during which the route can also be inspected (i.e., route nding during climbing), would indicate that experts, contrary to non-experts, were able to benet from route preview (route nding before climbing). Hence, experts did not need to stop that long or that often, once on the wall, for route visual inspection. The present study captured the essence of route preview and the inherent physiological and emotional demands of climbing by moving from previous laboratory-based or qualitative studies to an ecologically valid indoor climbing environment. Comparisons with past research are not straightforward given the extremely limited research investigating route preview-related processes and that these few studies had not been designed to assess route preview ecacy upon actual/physical performance. Because of resource limitations, the sample size was, therefore, relatively small and the interaction between climbers climbing ability and route diculty levels could not be investigated fully. Furthermore, it must be acknowledged that there is an inherent problem when using multiple climbing routes that are rated as similar (in diculty terms), as diculty ratings are ` res et al., 1993). Hence, it is subjective (Delignie possible for perceived diculty to vary with anthropometry, physiological and psychological traits of the individual climber. Although the specic routes used in this study were rated for diculty by certied route setters, it is still possible that a given route may be a better physiological or psychological t for a given climber. Also, underlying mechanisms that may mediate route preview, such as content, characteristics and function of the participants mental images and the role of memorization strategies and imagery ability, were not considered (Ille & Cadopi, 1999; Fournier et al., 2008). Thus, further research that investigates such mechanisms is warranted. Finally, given the inuence emotional states (Sanchez et al., 2010), imagery skills (Sanchez & Dauby, 2009), personality dierences (Llewellyn & Sanchez, 2008; Llewellyn et al., 2008) and type of ascent modality (e.g., leading vs top-roping; Draper et al., 2008, 2010) have upon actual climbing performance, their (interactive) role within route previewing warrants research. It is necessary to examine the role of such variables to propose, in the future, fully eective climbing-specic training programs (Bishop, 2008). Findings from performance-related domains other than sport where very similar processes and underlying mechanisms are engaged to produce best performances must guide future research within the sport of climbing. Of particular interest may be the experimental work developed within the area of music reading where research has examined its perceptual-cognitive coding processes, has compared performers (musicians vs no musicians), and has analyzed dierences between master, good and poor readers (see Sloboda, 1984, for a review). Perspectives The psychological techniques that climbers utilize to optimize performance are, at best, borrowed from other sports. In sport climbing, similarly to other sports practiced at a competitive level, an appropriate sport-specic psychological preparation is critical. Findings from this study may assist sport psychologists to the development of eective sport climbing mental skills training programs. The ability to visually inspect a climb before its ascent may represent an essential component of performance optimization, as success and failure at routes of a higher performance standard become increasingly marginal. Thus, sport climbers should incorporate in their general training programs techniques and strategies that promote the capturing and processing of information that are involved within the route preview process. We have established that route preview is an important aspect of optimal indoor sport climbing performance. Further research is needed to establish how this perceptual-cognitive skill can most eectively be incorporated into training regimes.
Key words: route preview, route nding, perceptualcognitive, expertise, climbing performance parameter.

Acknowledgements
Our gratitude to the climbers who participated in the study, to ne dicte Herbiet and Pierre Bastian for their assistance with Be the data collection, to Marc Boschker, Raymond Bruyer, Vanesa Espan ul Oudejans for their com a-Romero and Rao ments on earlier drafts and to the managers, sta, coaches and certied route setters of the indoor climbing club Entre Ciel et Terre (Belgium) for their support and assistance throughout the research.

71

Sanchez et al.
References
ASc i FH, Demirhan G, Dinc SC. Psychological prole of Turkish rock climbers: an examination of climbing experience and route diculty. Percept Mot Skills 2007: 104: 892900. Backe S, Ericson L, Janson S, Timpka T. Rock climbing injury rates and associated risk factors in a general climbing population. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2009: 19: 850856. Bishop D. An applied research model for the sport sciences. Sports Med 2008: 36: 253263. Boschker MSJ, Bakker FC, Michaels CF. Memory for the functional characteristics of climbing walls: perceiving aordances. J Mot Behav 2002: 34: 2536. Cumming J, Hall C. Deliberate imagery practice: the development of imagery skills in competitive athletes. J Sport Sci 2002: 20: 137145. ` res D, Famose J-P, The peautDelignie Mathieu C, Fleurance P. A psychophysical study of diculty rating in rock climbing. Int J Sport Psychol 1993: 24: 404416. Draper N, Jones GA, Fryer S, Hodgson CI, Blackwell G. Eect of an on-sight lead on the physiological and psychological responses to rock climbing. J Sport Sci Med 2008: 7: 492498. Draper N, Jones GA, Fryer S, Hodgson CI, Blackwell G. Physiological and psychological responses to lead and top rope climbing for intermediate rock climbers. Eur J Sport Sci 2010: 10: 13 20. Dupuy C, Ripoll H, Flahaut J. Spatial temporal motor organization of sport climbing. In: Laurent M, Therme P, s physiques eds. Recherches en activite et sportives. Aix-Marseille II: Centre de Recherche de lUEREPS, 1992: 3: 233 253. Dupuy C, Ripoll H. Analysis of visual motor strategies in climbing. Sci Mot 1989: 7: 1824. Espan a-Romero V, Ortega-Porcel FB, nez-Pavo n D, Gutie rrezArtero EG, Jime n MJ, Ruiz JR. Sainz A, Castillo Garzo Climbing time to exhaustion is a determinant of climbing performance in high-level sport climbers. Eur J Physiol 2009: 107: 517525. Ferrand C, Tetrard S, Fontayne P. Selfhandicapping in rock climbing: a qualitative approach. J Appl Sport Psychol 2006: 18: 271280. Flahaut JJ, Loslever P. Statistical characterisation of movements. II: application. Travail Hum 2000: 63: 129. Fournier JF, Deremaux S, Bernier F. Content, characteristics and function of mental images. Psychol Sport Exerc 2008: 9: 734748. Fye A, Peter I. The handbook of climbing. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Pelham Books, Penguin Books Ltd, 1997. Giles LV, Rhodes EC, Taunton JE. The physiology of rock climbing. Sport Med 2006: 36: 529545. Heyman E, De Geus B, Mertens I, Meeusen R. Eects of four recovery methods on repeated maximal rock climbing performance. Med Sci Sport Exerc 2009: 41: 13031310. Hodgson CI, Draper N, McMorris T, Jones G, Fryer S, Coleman I. Perceived anxiety and plasma cortisol concentration following rock climbing with diering safety-rope protocols. Br J Sport Med 2009: 43: 531535. International Federation of Sport Climbing (IFSC). International climbing competitions rules. Available at http://www.ifsc-climbing.org/ ?page_name 5 handbook (accessed October 7, 2009). Ille A, Cadopi M. Memory for movement sequences in gymnastics: eects of age and skill level. J Mot Behav 1999: 31: 290300. Jones G, Asghar A, Llewellyn DJ. The epidemiology of rock climbing injuries. Br J Sport Med 2008: 42: 773 778. Llewellyn DJ, Sanchez X. Individual dierences and risk taking in rock climbing. Psychol Sport Exerc 2008: 9: 413426. Llewellyn DJ, Sanchez X, Ashghar A, Jones G. Self-ecacy, risk taking and performance in rock climbing. Pers Ind Di 2008: 45: 7581. MacLeod D, Sutherland DL, Buntin L, Whitaker A, Aitchison T, Watt I, Bradley J, Grant S. Physiological determinants of climbing-specic nger endurance and sport rock climbing performance. J Sport Sci 2007: 25: 14331443. Morrison AB, Scho VR. Review of the physiological responses to rock climbing in young climbers. Br J Sport Med 2007: 41: 852861. Pijpers JR, Oudejans RRD, Bakker FC. Anxiety-induced changes in movement behaviour during the execution of a complex whole-body task. Q J Exp Psychol 2005: 58A: 428445. Ripoll H. The understandingacting process in sport: the relationship between the semantic and the sensorimotor visual function. Int J Sport Psychol 1991: 22: 221243. Sanchez X, Boschker MSJ, Llewellyn DJ. Pre-performance psychological states and performance in an elite climbing competition. Scan J Med Sci Sport 2010: 20: 356363. Sanchez X, Dauby N. Imagery and videomodelling in sport climbing. Can J Behav Sci 2009: 41: 93101. Sanchez X, Torregrosa M. The role of psychological factors in sport climbing: a qualitative analysis. R Psicol Dep 2005: 14: 177194. Sheel AW. Physiology of sport rock climbing. Br J Sport Med 2004: 38: 355359. Sloboda J.A. Experimental studies of music reading: a review. Music Percept 1984: 2: 222236. Stiehl J, Ramsey T. Climbing walls: a complete guide. Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, 2005. Watts PB, Joubert LM, Lish AK, Mast JD, Wilkins B. Anthropometry of young competitive sport rock climbers. Br J Sport Med 2003: 37: 420424. Watts PB. Physiology of dicult rock climbing. Eur J Appl Physiol 2004: 91: 361372.

72