/96-19_files/96-1900001im.jpg" width="718" height="1022" useMap="#Map">

Sport Psychology (PSY407)

Lesson 19

ANXIETY, AROUSAL, AND STRESS RELATIONSHIPS

This lecture is a continuation of lecture eighteen. We were looking at anxiety, arousal, and stress

relationship, and had divided this topic into six sections, they were:

Differentiating among the terms anxiety, arousal and stress

The multidimensional nature of anxiety

Antecedents of anxiety

Measurement of anxiety

Time-to-event nature of precompetitive anxiety

The relationship between anxiety and performance

We have looked at the first three sections in lecture eighteen and the remaining will be discussed in this

lecture.

Measurement of Anxiety

In recent years, the preferred method of measuring trait and state anxiety has been through the use of

pencil-and-paper inventories. Some commonly used inventories utilized or developed by sport

psychologists are listed below:

Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT)

TRAIT

Unidimensional

Multidimensional

Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS)

Unidimensional

Competitive State Anxiety Inventory (CSAI)

STATE

Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2)

Multidimensional

While pencil-and-paper inventories are the most common measures of anxiety, behavioral and

psychological assessments can be very effective. One category of behavioral measurement is direct

observation, where the experimenter looks for objective signs of arousal in the subject and records

them. Such things as nervous fidgeting, licking the lips, rubbing palms on pants or shirt, and change in

respiration could all be interpreted as behavioral signs of activation. The list on the next page shows

overt behavioral responses that can be used by the athlete to identify indicators of distress, or state

anxiety.

Checklist for Monitoring Distress-Related Behavioral Responses of the Athlete:

Clammy Hands

Tense Muscles

Diarrhea

Tense Stomach

Dry Mouth

Trembling Legs

Fidgeting

Unsettled Stomach

Increased Respiration

Voice Distortion

Irritability

Jitters

Licking of Lips

Mental Confusion

Mental Fatigue

Nausea

Need to Urinate

Physical Fatigue

Rapid Heart Rate

Scattered Attention

/96-19_files/96-1900002im.jpg" width="695" height="1066" useMap="#Map">

Sport Psychology(psy407)

Time-To-Event Nature of Precompetitive Anxiety

The ability to obtain independent measures of cognitive and somatic state anxiety has greatly enhanced our

knowledge about the athletic situation. One of the factors that is believed to significantly influence the quality of

the athletic experience is the level of state anxiety during the time leading up to competition. We have already

referred to this as precompetitive anxiety.

Precompetitive cognitive anxiety starts relatively high and remains high and stable as the time-to-event

approaches. Conversely, somatic anxiety remains relatively low until approximately twenty-four hours before the

event, and then increases rapidly as the event approaches. Once performance begins, somatic anxiety dissipates

rapidly, whereas cognitive state anxiety fluctuates throughout the contest as the probability of success/failure

changes.

The Relationship between Arousal and Athletic Performance

It is now necessary to use the term arousal as somewhat synonymous with state anxiety. This is the case because

researchers have routinely employed a test of state anxiety as the primary means for determining a subject's

arousal level. Consequently, most of the reported research will relate negative anxiety to sport and motor

performance.

The primary focus is to explain the relationship between arousal and athletic performance: It can be explained

by inverted-U theory and drive theory.

Inverted-U theory explains why the relationship between arousal and performance is curvilinear as opposed to

linear in nature. Conversely, drive theory proposes a linear relationship between arousal and performance.

The Inverted-U Theory

The inverted U theory has been around for as long as the arousal/performance relationship has been studied. It

simply states that the relationship between performance and arousal is curvilinear as opposed to linear, and takes

the form of an inverted-U.

One of the difficulties encountered in testing the inverted U theory with humans is our inability to precisely

measure arousal. For example, if in a particular study researchers fail to demonstrate that heightened arousal

causes a decrement in performance, it is not particularly damaging to the theory. The reason for this is that it

can always be argued that for that particular task, arousal was not high enough. If it had been higher

performance would have been declined. The problem is that from a human rights standpoint, the amount of

arousal researchers can induce is limited. For example, if arousal is induced through electric shock, how much

can the researcher elevate the voltage without violating the subject's rights?

Similarly as can be observed, a high level of arousal is necessary for the best performance in gross motor

activities such as weight lifting. Conversely, a lower level of arousal is best for a fine motor task such as putting

in golf. Each sport skill has its theoretical optimal level of arousal for best performance. Regardless of which

type of skill is being performed, they all conform to the inverted-U principle. Specifically, performance is lowest

when arousal is very high or very low, and highest when arousal is moderate, or optimum.

Evidence of an inverted-U relationship between athletic performance and arousal is documented in the

literature. Klavora (1978), Sonstroem and Bernardo (1982), were able to demonstrate that basketball

performance is related to level of arousal, with best performance occurring at moderate levels of arousal and

poorest performance tat high ot low levels. Similarly Simons, and Vevera (1987) and Burton (1988) reported

that best performance in pistol shooting and swimming, respectively, were related to somatic anxiety in away

consistent with inverted U predictions.

While it seems relatively clear that the nature of the relationship between athletic performance and arousal takes

the form of the inverted U, it is not clear why this occurs.

Drive Theory

The great contribution of drive theory is that it helps to explain the relationships between learning and arousal,

and between performance and arousal. Many young athletes are just beginning the process of becoming skilled

performers. The effect of arousal upon a beginner may be different from its effect upon a skilled performer.

The basic relationship between arousal and an athlete's performance at any skill level is given in the

following formula:

/96-19_files/96-1900003im.jpg" width="695" height="1066" useMap="#Map">

Sport Psychology(psy407)

Performance = Arousal x Skill Level

The basic tenets of drive theory are as follows:

1. Increased arousal (drive) will elicit the dominant response.

2. The response associated with the strongest potential to respond is the dominant response.

3. Early in learning or for complex tasks, the dominant response is the incorrect response.

4. Late in learning or for simple task, the dominant response is the correct response.

We can make several practical applications of these drive theory tenets. First, heightened levels of

arousal should benefit the skilled performer, but hamper the beginner. The coach with a relatively

young team should strive to create an atmosphere relatively low in anxiety and arousal. Low levels of

arousal should increase the beginner's chances of a successful performance. In turn, the experience of

success should strengthen self confidence. Skilled athletes, on the other hand, will benefit from an

increase in arousal. Similar applications can be made to the performance of simple and complex tasks.

For example, a complex task, such as throwing a knuckleball in baseball, will always require a low level

of arousal. Conversely, a very simple task, such as doing as high number of push-ups, would seem to

benefit from arousal. Utilizing drive theory predictions, the researchers hypothesized that increased

arousal caused by major league baseball pressure situations would cause a decrement in batting ( a

complex task). Four late-game pressure situations were compared with no pressure situations relative to

batting performance. Results showed a decrement in batting performance associated with increased

arousal, as predicted by drive theory.

Drive theory received tremendous amounts of attention from researchers between 1943 and 1970.

however, since then, interest in the theory has diminished significantly. The theory was extremely

difficult to test, and the tests that were conducted often yielded conflicting results.

References

Cox, H. Richard. (2002). Sport Psychology: Concepts and Applications. (Fifth Edition). New York:

McGraw-Hill Companies

Lavallec. D., Kremer, J., Moran, A., & Williams. M. (2004) Sports Psychology: Contemporary Themes.

New York: Palgrave Macmillan Publishers