Matteo Campagna
ITEN
Menu
Menu

A sizeable share of the score differences between archers comes down to mental factors

5 studies · 306 archers measured

ForContextAgainst19902000201020201986, for, n = 1882022, for, n = 612022, context, n = 372026, for, n = 152023, context, n = 5
Each circle is a study: its position gives the year, its row whether it is for, against or context, its size how many participants it measured. Light circles are studies on other populations or without archers.

How much of the score differences models with mental measures account for, study by study

Each row is a statistical model and the dot is the share of the score differences the model accounts for. None of the four studies gives an interval for this share, and the figure draws none. The models are not equivalent. Landers uses seven measures on 79 archers with complete data, picked from many because they correlated with score: three mental (dwelling on past mistakes, confidence, visual imagery) and four that are not (relative leg strength, endomorphy, reaction time, depth perception). The mental block row is the adjusted share of the three mental measures alone, which enter the regression first and so also take the share they have in common with the others; the row for 124 archers comes from a footnote in the paper, which admits up to three of seven values missing. Wang uses three psychological measures on 61 Chinese national team athletes, and as the outcome an index that combines competition scores with the athlete's technical grade. Aydin pools the 81 arrows of five archers aged 11 to 16, left after 24 of 105 were dropped to pass normality checks, with two indices from a consumer EEG headband, and compares arrows, not archers: that is why its row is context. Amtajawi uses three measures on fifteen archers and their training scores. With few people for each measure the share tends to inflate, and the adjusted version reduces it: for Landers from 58 to 53. All of these are associations measured at a single point in time: they say how far mental measures go together with score, not how many points would be gained by changing them. Data from: Landers et al. 1986, Wang et al. 2022, Aydın et al. 2023 and Amtajawi et al. 2026.
The numbers in the figure
Study or groupValue (percentage of score variance accounted for by the model (R² × 100))IntervalnStance
Landers 1986, seven measures5879for
Landers 1986, seven measures, adjusted5379for
Landers 1986, mental block alone, adjusted2679for
Landers 1986, 124 archers, adjusted39124for
Wang 2022, three psychological measures33.661for
Aydin 2023, two EEG indices, 81 arrows24.45context
Amtajawi 2026, three measures, training scores85.215for

In a statistical sense, yes, but the share changes a great deal with the sample and with the way it is counted, and it stays far from the percentages heard on the range. The largest study, on American recurve archers in 1986, finds that seven measures account for 58% of the score differences (53% adjusted) in 79 archers with complete data, and that the mental block, made up of dwelling on mistakes, confidence and visual imagery, is worth 26% of it, almost twice strength and build together (14%). Three details scale the figure down: the measures had been picked from many precisely because they correlated with score; the mental block enters the regression first and so takes the share it has in common with the others; and widening the sample to 124 archers with some missing data brings the adjusted share of the same analysis down from 53% to 39%. The more recent estimates sit in the same range or below: in 61 Chinese national team athletes the model's psychological factors account for about a third of the variability in results (R² = 0.34), with confidence weighing almost twice as much as attention, and in five young Turkish archers EEG indices of attention and calm account for a quarter of the difference from one arrow to the next. The highest value, 85% with three measures in fifteen Indonesian archers, is the least credible precisely because of that ratio between measures and people. All of these are cross-sectional associations: they say how far mental measures go together with score, not how many points would be gained by changing them.

Also phrased as: "archery is 90% mental"; "how much the mind matters in archery"; "psychological factors and score"; "the mental side makes the difference"

In practice

It is often repeated that at the top level archery is 80 or 90% mental, and that when technique is equal it is the head that makes the difference.

Evidence

  • 1986
    For Archers Published later

    188 American recurve archers of different levels, with mental, physical and visual measures; the hierarchical regression uses the 79 with complete data. Seven predictors, kept from many because they correlated with score above 0.25, account for 58% of the score differences (adjusted 53%; F(7,71) = 19.8, p < 0.001). The first block, with dwelling on past mistakes, confidence and visual imagery, is worth 26%, relative leg strength and endomorphy 14%, reaction time 5%, depth perception 8%; by entering first, the mental block also takes the variance it shares with the others. Five measures correctly classify 81% of archers as above or below 1,200 points (Wilks lambda 0.54). In a footnote, widening the sample to 124 archers admitted with at most three of seven values missing, the adjusted share falls from 0.53 to 0.39.

    A Psychobiological Study of Archery Performance · Daniel M. Landers, Stephen H. Boutcher, Min Q. Wang

  • 2022
    For Archers Published later

    61 Chinese national team athletes, questionnaires on cognitive reappraisal, sport confidence and attention, and a structural equation model of performance: the model accounts for 33.6% of the variability in results (R² = 0.336), with modest predictive ability (Q² between 0.085 and 0.173). Confidence has the largest total effect (0.574, interval 0.342 to 0.796), attention about half (0.344, 0.068 to 0.581), cognitive reappraisal none (-0.007, from -0.354 to 0.271).

    Effect of Cognitive Reappraisal on Archery Performance of Elite Athletes: The Mediating Effects of Sport-Confidence and Attention · Dongling Wang, Ti Hu, Rui Luo, Qiqi Shen, Yuan Wang, Xiujuan Li, et al.

  • 2022
    Context Archers Published later

    37 under-12 archers in West Jakarta, path model: eye-hand coordination weighs on score directly by 0.259 (6.7%) and through anxiety by 0.523 (27.35%, given as 26.4% in the conclusions); kinaesthetic perception directly by 0.130 (1.69%) and through anxiety by 0.435 (18.9%, given as 26.6% in the conclusions). The figures do not match between results and conclusions; a regional journal. It says that anxiety lies on the path between motor abilities and score, not how much of the score is mental.

    The effect of eye-hand coordination, kinesthetic perception and anxiety on the results archery scoring of athlete u-12 west jakarta · Nurikhwan Aziz Arifin, Ika Novitaria Marani, Mansur Jauhari

  • 2023
    Context Archers Published later

    5 young Turkish archers aged 11 to 16, 81 arrows, a one-channel consumer EEG headband: the attention and calm indices account for 24% of the score difference from one arrow to the next (R² = 0.244, F = 12.46, p < 0.01), with β 0.365 for calm and 0.303 for attention. It is a share computed on the pooled arrows of a few archers, not a comparison between archers, using the proprietary indices of a consumer device; a regional journal.

    Okçuluk Sporuyla Uğraşan Sporcuların Nöro-Geribildirim ile Odaklanma ve Sakinlik Analizi · Saygın Aydın, Vedat Ayan, Selami Yüksek

  • 2026
    For Archers Published later

    15 archers from a sports training centre in Central Java: confidence, concentration and goal setting together relate to training scores with R = 0.923 and R² = 0.852 (F = 21.04, p < 0.001). Three predictors on fifteen people easily inflate a share of this kind; a regional journal.

    The Correlation of Self-Confidence, Concentration, and Goal Setting with Routine Training Scores among Archery Athletes at BPPLOP Central Java · Richa Lintang Amtajawi, Heny Setyawati, Tommy Soenyoto

Status history

  1. 1984 Not studied Nobody in the registry's bibliography has yet tried to measure how much of the score differences between archers goes together with mental measures and how much with physical ones.
  2. 1986 Reported The first attempt, and for many years the only one: in 79 American recurve archers with complete data, seven measures account for 58% of the score differences, and the mental block alone for 26%, almost twice strength and build together. The same paper shows in a footnote how fragile the figure is: with 124 archers the adjusted share falls from 53% to 39%. A single cross-sectional sample, with measures picked from many for their correlation with score: reported, and the share should be read as an order of magnitude.
  3. 2022 Reported A second estimate comes from the Chinese national team: in 61 athletes the model's psychological factors account for about a third of the variability in results (R² = 0.34), with confidence weighing almost twice as much as attention. In the same year, in 37 under-12 archers, the link between motor abilities and score runs more through anxiety than directly. The Chinese estimate is a second cross-sectional association pointing the same way as the 1986 one, with a lower share; the under-12 model puts anxiety on the path to the score but does not estimate how much of the score is mental. The status stays at reported.
  4. 2023 Reported A different count arrives arrow by arrow: in five young Turkish archers, EEG indices of attention and calm account for a quarter of the score difference from one arrow to the next. The share is of the same order as the others, but it answers a different question, because it compares the arrows of a few archers rather than archers with each other: the status does not change.
  5. 2026 Reported In fifteen Indonesian archers, confidence, concentration and goal setting account for 85% of the differences in training scores. It is the highest share in the bibliography and the least credible, because three measures on fifteen people easily inflate the result. The associations remain cross-sectional, and the status stays at reported.

Related

Related articles

Research lines

Cite
APA

Campagna, M. (2026). A sizeable share of the score differences between archers comes down to mental factors (Version 1). In Evidence Registry. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/mind/mental-factors-share-of-score

BibTeX
@misc{campagna2026_fattorimentaliquotapunteggio,
  author = {Campagna, Matteo},
  title = {A sizeable share of the score differences between archers comes down to mental factors},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Evidence Registry, matteocampagna.com},
  url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/mind/mental-factors-share-of-score},
  note = {Version 1; accessed 2026-10-16}
}

Other claims in this domain

See all claims on mind and attention