Objectives: The study aimed to examine the utility of a traditional think aloud (TA) training package versus a golf specific TA training package.

Design: Social validation was used to assess participant’s perceptions and satisfaction of traditional TA training methods and task specific TA training methods.

Methods: Skilled (n = 10; handicap ≤ 5) competitive gofers were trained to use TA and then required to TA whilst completing a short game challenge on a golf practice green. Prior to performing, participants were allocated to their TA training treatment; traditional TA training or golf specific TA training. Specifically, the traditional training video incorporated alphabetical problems solving, mental arithmetic and general problem solving tasks and required participants to TA during these tasks. The golf specific training video incorporated three golf scenarios which required participants to verbalise their thoughts again whilst engaging in these tasks. Social validation interviews were conducted immediately following the short game challenge to explore each participant’s perceptions regarding the adequacy of the training they received. A deductive thematic analysis to identify satisfaction and evaluations of the training provided was conducted.

Results: Although both groups reported positive responses from the TA training they had received, the golf specific TA training group did provide more positive responses towards this type of training.

Conclusions: This study provides evidence that task specific training may be more appropriate for studies that employ the TA methodology and that researchers should consider this for future research within this area.