Stress, Anxiety & Performance

1. Stress, Anxiety & Performance

2. Definitions • Arousal • Stress • Anxiety • State • Trait • Cognitive • Somatic • Physiological Arousal • Activation What is somatic anxiety, how does it differ from physiological arousal, and does this make sense? (note: William James thought deeply about this in 1890)

3. Side note – James & emotion • James on free will (and perhaps emergence) • James on emotion Just a little contrast with what comes later – see Wenger Cause and effect might not be as simple as you imagine

4. Anxiety, arousal, & Performance • So, there’s lots of kinds of arousal and anxiety. • How are they related to performance? • There are several theories • First, how do you think they are related to performance? • Think about it…how do anxiety and arousal regulate performance for you?

5. Anxiety & Performance • Making a start: • Drive theory (Hull & Spence, 1943; Zajonc, 1965)

6. Anxiety & Performance • Next (for us, not in the research chronology): • The “Inverted-U hypothesis” & “Zones of optimal functioning” (ZoF)

7. Anxiety & Performance • Multidimensional anxiety theory • based on the distinction between cognitive anxiety and somatic anxiety. The theory predicts: • a negative but linear relationship between cognitive anxiety and performance • an inverted U relationship between somatic anxiety and performance • Somatic anxiety should decline once performance begins but cognitive anxiety may remain high if confidence is low • ...hasn’t really got much support...yet

8. Anxiety & Performance • Catastrophe Theory (Hardy & Fazey, 1987) One example of the many models posited – the general idea is one of higher order interactions (seems intuitively appealing to me)

9. Anxiety & Performance • Catastrophe Theory/Models A model showing hysteresis – a non-linear approach to the arousal performance relationship (this just illustrates one of the predictions of catastrophe theory)

10. Anxiety & Performance • Catastrophe Theory/Models • “Current” evidence - effect of self-confidence As self-confidence increases...

11. Anxiety & Performance • Catastrophe Theory/Models • Current evidence - hysteresis effects “Cusp point” “Bifurcation” factor Effort? “Asymmetry” factor

12. Anxiety & Performance • Catastrophe Theory/Models • Current evidence - hysteresis effects Worry Explanations fit a processing efficiency theory approach (see later) Effort?

13. Explanations/Theories • Conscious processing hypothesis • Reinvestment of declarative knowledge under high anxiety • Tied to ideas of explicit/implicit learning, use of process vs. outcome goals (see KNR 406) and so on • Masters (1992) • Golf putting

14. Masters 1992 • 400 practice golf putts, 100 test putts • 5 conditions • Explicit learning – given rules • Implicit learning – no rules, and letter generation during practice • Implicit Learning control* • Stressed control • No-stressed control* • All complete 100 test putts, but * groups had no stress while others did

15. Masters 1992 • Rule generation, and stress level on final session

16. Masters 1992 • Performance across five sessions • Note pattern for implicit group, explicit group, sessions 4-5

17. Masters 1992 • Performance across five sessions • Explicit learning – rule acquisition • Resulted in performance decrement under stress • Implicit learning – no rule acquisition • No performance decrement under stress

18. Anxiety and Performance • Anxiety types, or intensities • Choking vs. panic • Kennedy vs. Novotna (New Yorker, 2000) • Panic is blind fear? • Choking is considered failure? • Choking is the domain of everyone (maybe most spectacularly of the expert?), panic of the inexperienced, perhaps? • Stereotype threat (Beilock et at, 2006) • Give black students and white students a test • Tell them its about intelligence • Whites students do better • Tell them its “just a lab tool” • No difference • Awareness of stereotype alters anxiety reaction

19. Anxiety and Performance • Stereotype threat and working memory • Induces increased conscious processing (working memory) • Induces choking, rather than panic. • Increased explicit monitoring can affect both motor and cognitive tasks…

20. Anxiety and Performance • If performance of hard tasks requires more WM capacity, and some excel because of increased WM capacity, then when under pressure these might be the people that blow it…

21. Anxiety and Performance • Note difference between slopes for low WM group and high WM group for high demand tasks…

22. Explanations/Theories • Theory of Ironic processing (Wegner, multiple citations) • Cool! • Tricia’s presentation • Ever laid awake in bed and thought: “I mustn't think about that exam, so I can get to sleep” • What happens next?

23. Explanations/Theories • Theory of Ironic processing (Wegner, multiple citations) • Similar performance expectations to the conscious processing hypothesis • Based on the notion that “free will” is a lot more complicated than one might first think

24. Explanations/Theories • Theory of Ironic processing (Wegner, multiple citations) • Mental control: intentional operations + ironic monitoring • Under increased mental load...monitoring outweighs operating, people focus on that which they are trying to avoid, and disaster ensues • Another area that has taken off, though not in sports psychology as much as mainstream psychology

25. Explanations/Theories • Theory of Ironic processing (Wegner, multiple citations) • Operating process: carry out intended actions (conscious/effortful) • Monitoring process: check that all’s well [if not, renew] (unconscious/automatic) • Suppression: operating process searches for distractors, while monitor searches for the unwanted thought • mental load lessens operator function but not monitor, so ironic thoughts pop up even more frequently

26. Explanations/Theories • Theory of Ironic processing (Wegner, multiple citations)

27. Explanations/Theories • Putt and the pendulum • Mental load resulted in greater overshooting of target on experimental putt (i.e. when told to make sure they don’t)