Part 5: Theories of Arousal-Performance Relationship

• Drive Theory

  •  There is a linear (straight line) relationship between performance & arousal : the more highly aroused (ie. ‘psyched-up’) the athlete, the better the performance - More is better!
• Drive Theory

  •  There is a linear (straight line) relationship between performance & arousal : the more highly aroused (ie. ‘psyched-up’) the athlete, the better the performance.  More is better!
• Drive Theory

  • More is better!
  • What drives performance 
  • Low arousal = Low performance; High arousal = Better performance 
  • More (arousal) is better 
  • However more is not always better 
  • As increase arousal will lead to more dominant performance
  • If good, then perform well with high arousal 
  • If bad, then perform even worse 
  • Doesn’t explain performance for everybody 
  • Moved from drive theory (but still important, learn from it)
• Drive Theory - Predictions

  1. Increased arousal increases the probability of the dominant response
  2. Performance will improve with increases in arousal if the skill is simple &/or the dominant response is the correct response 
• Drive Theory - Predictions

  1. Increased arousal increases the probability of the dominant response
  2. Performance will improve with increases in arousal if the skill is simple &/or the dominant response is the correct response 

  • Doesn’t consider that even elite can choke 
  • Even experienced athletes can succumb to pressure 
  • Principles important, as to why we’ve moved on from it
• Inverted-U Theory 

  • More not better at a stage that more is gonna hinder performance 
  • There is an inverted-U relationship between arousal & performance; performance will increase in proportion to increase in arousal up to certain point 
  • Beyond this optimal level, performance will begin to decrease    [see diagram]

  
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Is different for different individuals & activity 
  • But is a point for everyone where more is not going to be better 
  • Is not half way (as shown in diagram)
  • Peak is a moving target (depends on individual/activity)
  • Optimal level arousal key predictor of getting in the zone, & having a good flow

  
• Inverted-U Theory 

  • More not better at a stage that more is gonna hinder performance 
  • There is an inverted-U relationship between arousal and performance; performance will increase in proportion to increase in arousal up to certain point.  Beyond this optimal level, performance will begin to decrease    [see diagram]

  
• Inverted-U Theory

  1. Best or Ideal performance results from optimal arousal
  2. Different sports have different optimal levels of arousal: eg.,  golf putting / free throw shooting vs shot put
  3. Each sportsperson has her or his slightly different optimal level of arousal

  
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Best or Ideal performance results from optimal arousal:
  • Best performance is… the flow experience 
  • Under-arousal can lead to… to boredom & poor performance 
  • Over-arousal can lead to… choking
  • Motivation/arousal gets in the way of performance
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Different sports have different optimal levels of arousal - eg shot put vs rugby (part 1):
  • Even different tasks within than sport can require different levels of arousal (eg playing basketball vs taking a free throw)
  • Tasks requiring fine motor control, involving steadiness, intense concentration & coordination (eg., golf, archery, rifle-shooting) require lower arousal levels
  • Tasks requiring explosive strength, endurance & speed (eg. sprinting, cycling, skiing, weightlifting) require higher levels of arousal.   [see diagram]
  • Managing arousal 

  
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Different sports have different optimal levels of arousal - (eg golf vs shot put) (part 2):
  • Examples: Long distance golf shot vs putting (need to adjust)
  • There is more than 1 inverted U 
  • For different athletes & task 
  • But principles still apply of optimal level of arousal 
  • Is a moving target for different tasks within a sport & bw/ different sports; as well as for different individuals within the same sport 
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Different sports have different optimal levels of arousal (eg.,  golf vs shot put) (part 3):
  • Problem: Many sports that involve speed and strength also involve focused attention and coordination…
  • eg.,  basketball, netball, soccer, hockey etc
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Each sportsperson has their slightly different optimal level of arousal: [see diagram]
  • Some better who are cool & calm vs someone who is emotional & excited (but still both perform well = equally competent level)
  • Individual differences
• Inverted-U Theory

  • Summary: Peak performance occurs at optimal level of arousal, but optimal levels vary across skills/tasks/sport & across individuals 
• Catastrophe Theory (Hardy, 1996) [* a key theory]

  • Not a gradual slope after peak 
  • Take principles of inverted U 
  • Theory will be in exam 
• Catastrophe Theory 

  1. Multidimensional Arousal & Anxiety
  2. Catastrophe Curve

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Multidimensional Arousal & Anxiety
  • Multidimensional arousal (somatic), cognitive arousal, & anxiety are multidimensional
  • The ‘symmetrical’ curve of the Inverted-U is not very realistic

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Multidimensional Arousal & Anxiety
  • Multidimensional arousal (somatic), cognitive arousal, & anxiety are multidimensional
  • To look at arousal for physiological & psychological
  • Psych yes; physio yes but…

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Multidimensional Arousal & Anxiety
  • The ‘symmetrical’ curve of the Inverted-U is not very realistic
  • Not perfect parabola 
  • Need to look at physiological & psychological arousal separately 

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Catastrophe Curve  
  • Increase in physiological arousal leads to increase performance up to a certain (optimal/critical) point  
  • ===>> after this point is reached the person perceives an an imbalance between demands and capabilities (ie. stress), which leads to cognitive anxiety & performance suddenly & dramatically drops/falls (ie. choking)

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Catastrophe Curve  
  • Increase in physiological arousal leads to increase performance up to a certain (optimal/critical) point  
  • ===>> after this point is reached the person perceives an an imbalance between demands and capabilities (ie. stress), which leads to cognitive anxiety & performance suddenly & dramatically drops/falls (ie. choking)

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Catastrophe Curve
  • If start having stressful thoughts start interacting with physiological arousal
  • Situation can influence state anxiety 

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Catastrophe Curve  
  • Up to optimal point is the same as the inverted U theory 
  • Window where can return back to optimal point 
  • But after catastrophic crash can’t go back to optimal got to start back from start 
  • eg like a wave, go to catch next one if fall instead of rebalancing self 
  • Point of no return
  • But if recognise you’re getting stressed etc can have tools/strategies to cope to get back on track to avoid cognitive anxiety 

  
• Catastrophe Theory 

  • Catastrophe Curve  
  • Focus on physiological & psychological separately 
  • If stress shows up, can end up w/ cognitive state anxiety  = choke (crash & burn)
  • Why? - next section
  • If no why can help prevent it
• • [Zone of Functioning;  Reversal Theory. Weinberg & Gould, 2019]
  • High arousal only leads to anxiety if stress is involved
  • Don’t feel like can do it 
• Theories of Arousal-Performance Relationship

  • Drive Theory
  • More is better
  • Inverted-U Theory
  • Optimal level, too high or too low arousal = poor performance
  • Catastrophe Theory
  • Optimal level with a point of no return
  • Zone of Functioning
  • Individual optimal zone