Effects of imagery practice on basketball-related skills and psychological outcomes: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Imagery practice is widely used in basketball training. Its effects on basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes remain uncertain because most trials are small and assess heterogeneous outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis examined the effects of imagery practice on basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials were included when they compared imagery practice with usual training or a control condition without imagery. Hedges' g was calculated from change scores. Positive values indicated better outcomes after imagery practice. Bayesian multilevel models were used to account for dependent effect sizes arising from multiple outcomes, intervention arms, or testing conditions within the same study, thereby reducing the risk of inflated precision when clustered sport-imagery effects are treated as independent. Outcome subgroup analyses, population subgroup analyses, duration models, publication bias tests, model diagnostics, and GRADE assessment were conducted. RESULTS: The analysis included 39 effect sizes from 14 study units. Across basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes, imagery practice showed a positive overall effect, Hedges' g, 1.08, 95% HDI, 0.65 to 1.52, BF10, 317.67. The clearest outcome evidence was found for free throw performance, Hedges' g, 0.89, 95% HDI, 0.38 to 1.40, BF10, 13.85. Positive effects were also estimated for motor coordination control and self-efficacy, but these outcomes were based on fewer studies. Evidence was imprecise for basketball shooting accuracy, free throw performance under time pressure, and three point shooting because the 95% HDI crossed zero. Egger regression suggested small study effects. Model diagnostics were acceptable, with Rhat values close to 1.00. CONCLUSION: Imagery practice may improve basketball-related outcomes, with the most defensible evidence observed for free throw performance. Evidence for motor coordination/control and self-efficacy should be interpreted as secondary and indirect support rather than direct evidence of basketball skill improvement. Current evidence remains limited by small samples, clustered effects, and possible small-study effects. Future trials should use larger samples, clearer allocation methods, and standardized basketball skill outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261389048.