A useful example from research
One useful example comes from tennis. A 2025 randomized pilot study in BMC Psychology evaluated eight weeks of the Perform-UP Tennis app together with regular meetings with a sport psychologist. The analysis included 41 players and reported improvements in several self-reported psychological skills in the intervention group. The detail about those meetings matters when interpreting what the study tells us.
That is promising evidence for the combined program. It does not isolate the app’s effect from the professional support, prove better match results or test Reset. The small pilot also cannot answer every question about other sports or age groups. Read the intervention details before borrowing a study’s conclusion for another product.
Ask what “works” means
For an athlete, “does it work?” may mean being able to use a routine when the moment arrives. A research paper might instead measure a questionnaire response or performance on an app task. Both questions deserve clear answers, but they are different questions. Look for the outcome behind the claim before deciding how much it says about your own sport.
For any strong claim, look for the actual product studied, the comparison group, the length of the program and the outcome measured. Also check whether participants received coaching or other support. A quote from a successful athlete can describe their experience, but it does not answer those research questions.
Check usefulness without pretending it is a clinical trial
Choose a specific practice goal, such as remembering your routine before a serve. Try one lesson, take the routine to practice and record what happened. This can help you decide whether the instruction is clear and usable. It cannot establish that the app caused an improvement in performance.
Use a small record: the situation, the cue, whether you remembered it and your next action. If you repeatedly forget, simplify the cue or discuss where it belongs with your coach. If you understand the lesson but never find a place to use it, the teaching may need a better connection to your sport.
What we can say about Reset
Reset offers guided mental skills practice and a public sample you can try. We do not claim that Reset has clinical-trial evidence showing improved competition results. The intended value is a clear way to learn, rehearse and apply a mental skill, with practice you can describe afterward.
You can hold two ideas together: ask for honest evidence and give a well-explained skill a fair chance in practice. Notice whether you understand the cue and recognize somewhere to use it. Keep asking questions about stronger performance promises. You deserve teaching you can follow and an account of its evidence that makes sense without a sales pitch.
Sources and further reading
- Bordo, Costanzo and Villani, BMC Psychology (2025)
Randomized pilot of an eight-week app-plus-professional program. Self-report outcomes and a combined intervention do not establish standalone app effects or validate Reset.