## 4 Discussion
Furthermore, psychological interventions aimed at improving self-efficacy may reduce anxiety and enhance task execution, providing valuable strategies for training programs. This study has several limitations. First, prior research has highlight the importance of controlling for the frequency of feedback delivery [9], as this factor can significantly influence the efficiency of task performance. In the present study, the feedback frequency was not systematically controlled, which may have affected the outcomes. Additionally, it is essential to understand the degree to which participants 'believe' or accept the content of the feedback they receive [44; 50], as it can impact their performance and motivation. Our study did not measure the participants' perceived credibility of the feedback, which may have introduced variability in their responses. Another limitation concerns the composition of the study groups. We focused only on two groups (attributional and non-attributional groups). Future research could benefit from including additional groups, such as one with a dysfunctional attributional style (external, uncontrollable, and stable) and another group that does not receive any feedback. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how different attributional styles and the absence of feedback affect task performance and motivation. It is also important to note that the study sample was limited to a specific population group, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings. Future studies should consider including a more diverse sample, including athletes with different levels of experience, to assess whether the results generalize to populations with greater variability in precision task experience. Furthermore, due to the cross-sectional design of the study, we were unable to assess changes over time or the long-term effects of the interventions. Longitudinal studies could help examine how expectation and self-efficacy-based interventions impact performance over time, providing a more complete understanding of their lasting effects. Finally, we did not control for potential variations in the wording of feedback statements, which could have elicited different motivational responses [24; 25]. Standardizing the language of feedback more rigorously in future studies would be essential to better isolate the specific effects of feedback type on performance and motivation. In terms of future directions, expanding the study to explore how individual differences, such as personality traits or prior experience, interact with feedback type could provide deeper insights. Additionally, investigating the long-term effects of feedback on performance and motivation across different tasks or contexts would contribute to a more holistic understanding of the role of feedback in learning and performance improvement. Further research could explore how cultural differences influence the perception and effectiveness of feedback, as well as how feedback affects more complex or team-based tasks. Investigating emotional factors like anxiety or self-confidence could provide insights into how these variables moderate the impact of feedback. Additionally, studies should assess the role of feedback across different task types (cognitive, physical, creative) and include diverse samples to improve generalization. Finally, the use of new technologies, such as real-time biofeedback or AI systems, could offer innovative approaches to enhance learning and performance.