## 4 Discussion  
The present study sought to investigate the role of negative NF, when delivered in an attributional or non-attributional manner, on short-term performance in a closed motor skill task. We hypothesized that those participants receiving negative NF in an attributional (internal, controllable, and unstable) manner would obtain higher scores on a dart-throwing task than those receiving non-attributional negative NF. As a second hypothesis, it was expected that those participants who received attributional negative NF, compared to those who receive non-attributional negative NF, would maintain higher scores in the retention and transfer tests carried out 24 h after the practice phase. Regarding the first hypothesis, it was found that those who received negative social NF presented in an attributional way (internal, controllable, and unstable) obtained higher scores on the dart-throwing task than participants who received negative social NF presented in a non-attributional way. These data are congruent with the prediction made by Weiner [31]. Furthermore, this author established that individuals who use internal, controllable, and unstable causes to explain personal failure tend to experience positive motivational consequences, which results in a functional attributional style as it increases persistence and improves task performance due to practice [32]. Similarly, our results are in line with the improvements observed in the study by Halperin et al. [27], who delivered positive AF (pAF), nAF, and a no-AF condition and found that participants applied greater forces and showed greater EMG activity in the nAF condition than the other two conditions. Halperin et al. [27] explain these results by appealing to the notion that nAF may have triggered an emotion of anger, which has been shown to positively influence performance with tasks requiring force and power production [45; 46], or that nAF may trigger negative feelings, indicating that the rate of progress towards a goal is too low and that more effort needs to be made [47; 48]. In this sense, it is feasible to interpret our findings as indicating that nAF may have a positive influence on precision tasks, in addition to tasks where force and power production are required. In a similar vein, it has been reported that, in some circumstances, nAF can have practical benefits over non-feedback [27]. However, it has been noted that nAF should be administered with caution, as it may also hinder motivation and self-efficacy over time, as shown by Garcia et al. [20], who found that a group receiving negative feedback showed significantly lower levels of subjective vitality following a handball throwing task. Figure 2: Evolution of the score in Session 1 [phases Ph1-Ph2-Ph3-Ph4] and Session 2 [Ph5-Ph6]. Note: Attributional—G1: Attributional Negative NF Group; No attributional—G2: Non-Attributional Negative NF Group; Ph: Phase; **\(p<0.01\); **\(p<0.05\)**. These contradictory results could be explained by the fact that the authors did not differentiate between attributional (pAF: [1] \"Great effort\" [3] \"You look strong\"; nAF: [1] \"You are not trying hard\" [3] \"You can do better\") and non-attributional (pAF: [2] \"Excellent values\"; nAF: [2] \"Low values\") feedback. When explaining this lack of support in certain nAF conditions compared with the no-AF condition, it should also be noted that participants given nAF on knowledge of result at low frequencies may not show improvement during practice and in the 24 h retention phase [9]. Thus, in the present study, it is possible that the greater improvement in performance shown by the dart throwers given attributional negative feedback (internal, controllable, unstable) can be seen as an indication that the participants were not making sufficient effort to improve the execution of a skill that depends on them.