This mental trick helps you run faster in just seconds, according to science

A few words, said the right way, can help you run faster. Not next month or after a few training sessions, but immediately. A study with elite athletes in their teens found that simple, environment-focused word cues instantly improved sprint speed over a distance of at least 20 yards.

The effect of using these word cues was an increase of about three percentage points, a change that typically takes weeks of hard work and practice to achieve.

Word cues move bodies

The study was led by Dr. Jason Moran at the University of Essex, working with Tottenham Hotspur’s academy. It tested how phrasing shapes performance during very short sprints.

“The words we speak to athletes have a demonstrable and instant effect on their performance,” said Dr. Moran. He added that directing attention to what surrounds an athlete tends to work better than focusing on body parts.

The headline number came from a controlled comparison of different cue types. When athletes heard cues that targeted the environment, their sprint times improved relative to cues that targeted their own limbs and joints.

What the experiment tested

Twenty academy players, ages 14 to 15, completed repeated 22-yard sprints after hearing one short instruction before each run.

The cues fell into five categories, including external focus cues, internal focus cues, and analogies that pointed attention toward or away from a target in space.

External cues outperformed internal ones for sprinting, with a large effect size compared to body-focused instructions. A specific set of directional analogies, the “away” type, also beat internal cues for speed.

Not every comparison showed a difference, which matters. Vertical jump height barely budged across cue types, and a simple neutral prompt to try your best matched or beat some of the fancier wording.

How word cues shape speed

Researchers have long used the constrained action hypothesis to explain why wording matters. Focusing inside the body can create conscious micromanagement that slows movement, while external focus allows more automatic control to take over.

Reviews and meta-analyses back this up across many sports and tasks. On average, external focus improves performance and learning compared to internal instructions, and it often reduces muscular effort for the same output.

This does not mean one magic sentence fits all. The benefit of external focus shows up in patterns, yet the size of the effect depends on the skill, the person, and the moment.

Who benefits most

The Essex results came from well-trained teens in a professional pathway, not beginners.

Prior work in youths across multiple countries reported that cue type sometimes made little difference, suggesting experience and context matter a lot.

In some elite adult settings, changing attentional focus can even disrupt an automatic skill.

One study with highly trained sprinters found they performed best when given no extra attentional cue at all, a reminder that over-coaching can backfire in advanced performers.

For teenagers who train seriously but are still developing, the sweet spot may be short, clear wording that points outside the body. That is exactly where the Essex academy cohort saw speed gains.

What this means for training

Coaches often use analogy to pack complex mechanics into a few words. In this study, phrases that described acting on the surface or moving toward a target, rather than pushing a specific body part, were tied to faster accelerations over 22 yards.

External focus cues may help by easing cognitive load during the first few steps of a sprint.

The athlete locks onto an outcome in the environment, and the nervous system handles the details of coordination without extra chatter.

Evidence across motor learning suggests these benefits can carry into retention and transfer, not just in the moment. That is good news for anyone teaching short, explosive efforts were fractions of a second matter.

Small words cue big margins

The sprint advantage did not extend to jumping in this sample. For jumps, a plain request to perform maximally was often as good as, or better than, crafted cues.

Cue benefits also varied by direction and wording. Not all analogies were equal, and some did not beat internal cues when tested head-to-head.

Age and training history likely play a role. Large cross-cultural youth data show mixed results, hinting that attention skills and prior exposure to cueing shape how well a phrase works on any given day.

A three percent change over 22 yards is a small number on the clock but a big deal in a footrace. In a crowded penalty area or along the touchline, that margin separates a clean break from a missed chance.

Short cues are also low cost. They require no equipment, no extra time, and can fit into warmups or standard drills.

Clear, environment-first language is not a cure-all. It is a practical lever to test, monitor, and adjust based on how an athlete responds.

The study is published in the Journal of Sports Sciences.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–