Performance under pressure has been observed by many different people throughout the course of many hundred years and the mystery behind "choking", or altering the way you would originally perform a skill, is slowly unraveling in the scientific community. Scientists have recognized that athletes, whether novice or professional, are notorious for performing differently when immense amounts of pressure are added to their performance. However, there are athletes that perform better when pressure is added. The reason behind this common occurrence in athletes has been unexplainable for many years, yet some recent research and studies are starting to show a trend in the "choking" displayed by athletes. Despite common thought, when an athlete performs poorly in a competition, the reason is not always that they were just nervous or ill-prepared. In this article, the reasons behind choking will be explored and explained, as well as ways to train that will help minimize these devastating errors. Based on scientific studies, the use of new training techniques will allow athletes to be better adept to performing under pressure situations without "choking".
The term "choking" is a widely referenced phrase when talking about elite athletes that seem to crack under pressure. This phenomenon assumedly occurs because players get nervous and aren't as aggressive with their skills and techniques. While this might be true in some cases, Catherine Caruso produced an article focusing on the study of neuroscientist Sian Beilock, attempting to discover the real reason that athletic performance is altered when the player is under extreme amounts of pressure. Beilock performed a study in which he asked novice and professional golfers to putt as many balls as they could in a set amount of time. The results showed that novice players had more trouble when putting quickly, whereas the experts had more trouble putting when they took their time (Caruso 2017). Beilock concluded that once a person had mastered something, they started performing the task outside of their conscious awareness (Caruso 2017). However, once pressure is placed on that person and anxiety sets in, they begin overthinking the skill which causes them to make mistakes. The cerebellum is responsible for complex actions when a person is on autopilot, such as an elite gymnast doing, what they would consider, a simple double back on the floor. However, when the person begins focusing on the individual steps of the skill, the cerebral cortex takes over and causes problems with the task you were performing. This is because the cerebral cortex is responsible, amongst many other things, for the voluntary muscle movement in the body. Once a skill is transferred to the "autopilot" section of our brain, the cerebral cortex is no longer responsible for practicing this skill, which is why mistakes occur when pressure is added to a situation. This is important to many people because millions of athletes are afflicted with nerves and thus, a sub-par performance. After her findings, Beilock suggested that athletes practice with conditions as similar as possible to those that they will be competing in (Caruso 2017). This helps the cerebral cortex become accustomed to high-pressure situations, as well as what to do when anxiety and nerves set it. This is extremely helpful to many athletes because it can decrease the number of mistakes made in games and competitions, as well as increase the scores and performance of many players from many different sports. In addition to Beilock's findings, many other different propositions as to the factors that affect athletic performance have been discovered, including the topics tackled by Rongjun Yu in his article, Choking Under Pressure: The Neuropsychological Mechanisms of Incentive-Induced Performance Decrements. Yu (2015) states that "choking" can occur in a performance due to the distraction account, the explicit monitoring account, and the over-arousal account. The distraction account eludes to the theory that high pressure can distract an athlete from the task at hand, the explicit monitoring account states that attention to the step-by-step completion of the skill is raised, and the over-arousal account explains that arousal is increased when under pressure (Yu 2015). For example, Olympian Matthew Emmons blew his shot at the Olympic gold medal in the 50 m rifle event at both the 2004 Olympics and the 2008 Olympics after dominating most of the competition (Yu 2015). There is no definite explanation to this situation, however one could apply all three of these accounts to the scenario. Based on the distraction account, Emmons could have been dealing with other problems while competing that caused him to not be fully focused on the task ahead. Using the explicit monitoring account, scientists could conclude that Emmons overthought his performance and based on Beilock's research, the skill was performed using his cerebral cortex which could cause unusual errors in his performance. The over-arousal account would imply that Emmons experienced a rush of different emotions, such as nervousness, anxiety, excitement, and pressure, during the Olympics that distracted him from performing his task to the best of his abilities. While many would agree that Matthew Emmons practiced under high-pressure situations leading up to the Olympics, there are specific ways provided by Yu's research that have been proven to mitigate the possibility of choking more than others.
A study done by Ramirez and Beilock in 2011 tested the mental effect of journaling before a stressful performance or test. In the study, Ramirez and Beilock had two groups of students, both of which taking a test. One group was instructed to write a creative or expressive piece of literature before taking the test, including any feelings of anxiety they had towards the upcoming exam. The other group of students just took the test, without doing anything special before taking it. The results showed that the group of students who journaled their feelings before taking the exam scored higher than the group of students who just took the test without writing. Science shows that journaling has been linked to relieving high amounts of stress and anxiety, both of which can contribute to poor athletic performance. While it might seem redundant, using journaling as an emotional outlet can be used by athletes who are notorious for displaying high levels of anxiety and stress preemptive to an important game, competition, or tournament. Another practice proposed in Yu's article for reducing the likelihood of choking under pressure was explored by Autin and Croizet in 2012 when their research suggested the use of reappraisal and re-framing metacognitive interpretations of difficulty. Reappraisal can be defined as changing the way one views an emotional event and is helpful in refocusing the mind and body during stressful situations. Therapists can also use a technique described as "re-framing metacognitive interpretations of difficulty", which involves the practice of recognizing thoughts linked to anxiety and nerves, but then disputing them. This allows athletes to recognize that they might have fear of something, but then contend why they should not have those thoughts. In order to test the effectiveness of both of these methods, Autin and Croizet told students that physiological responses, such as sweaty palms and/or rapid heartbeat, are actually beneficial for thinking and reasoning, thus encouraging them to see their natural reaction to pressure as something positive (Autin and Croizet 2012). The students who received reappraisal statements, in combination with re-framing their metacognitive interpretations of difficulty, scored higher on their test than the students who didn't receive any therapeutic treatments (Autin and Croizet 2012). This proves that changing your mindset before any performance can lead to a better outcome. An athlete can switch their mindset by choosing to focus on the positive aspects of their life, such as the ability to do what they love every day, their capability of entertaining people in their community, and the opportunity to inspire the people around them. In addition to pressure induced by the magnitude of an event, pressure placed by stereotypes also have a factor on athletic performance. In a study done by Anne Krendi, Izzy Gainsburg, and Nalini Ambady, they explored the exact effects of stereotypically induced pressure on a group of white males. The men watched several videos, each depicting something different. First, they watched a video showing that white NBA players were the best free-throwers in the NBA, which was considered a positive stereotype. Second, they watched a video saying that black NBA players were the best free-throwers, which was considered a negative stereotype, with respect to the audience viewing the video. Lastly, they watched a race-equal video of white and black players scoring an equal amount of free-throw points, which was considered as the control. After watching each of the videos, the men shot a round of free-throws and the results showed that more shots were made after the men watched the video depicting white basketball players as the best free-throw shooters in the NBA and less shots were made after watching the video depicting black players as the best free-throw shooters in the NBA (Krendi, Gainsburg, Ambady n.d.). This study proves that while most stereotypes aren’t accurate, their presence still has an effect on athletic performance and the pressure experienced while performing. While this problem cannot be completely avoided, athletes can discover ways to build and maintain their confidence, despite any stereotypes, by boosting their self-esteem through the use of music, specifically designed words and phrases, and positive reinforcements from coaches and teammates.
Despite all of these factors that have been proven to help athletes perform better under pressure, there is still an aspect of sports and competition that cannot always be controlled. These things include body type, metabolism, fast twitch muscles, etc. Sandra Upson published an article in 2014 including the findings of researchers at the OptiBrain Center at the University of California, San Diego, as well as the Naval Health Research Center in regards to a small part of the brain called the insula. The insula is a portion of the cerebral cortex that is folded deep within the lateral sulcus. This portion of your brain is responsible for facilitating the concept of self-awareness, including the awareness of our bodies and emotions, and how they interact to create our perception of the present moment. For example, your insula would be the part of your brain responsible for deciding to walk along the lit side of a street at night instead of walking along the dark side because it informs your brain of potential emotions that your body could experience in the future. Martin Paulus, along with his colleagues at the OptiBrain Center have proposed that "…the insula may serve as the critical hub that merges high-level cognition with a measure of the body's state, to insure proper functioning of the muscles and bones that throw javelins and land twirling dismounts from the high bar. "The key idea we're after is how somebody responds when they get a cue that predicts something bad will happen," Paulus says. The folks that are performing more optimally are the ones who are able to use that anticipatory cue to adjust themselves and return to equilibrium (Paulus 2014). In the late 1990s, neuroanatomist A.D. Craig at Barrow Neurological Insitute
Aside from communicating with the cerebral cortex, the insula is in close connection with the anterior cingulate cortex, an area crucial for decision-making, to evaluate and prioritize those stimuli.