ay
The ability to remain calm and make effective decisions under pressure, even in the most chaotic of the circumstances, is fundamental to achieve goals in various domains of life. Despite this, performance can be negatively impacted by stressful situations in several scenarios. This phenomenon is well known in sporting environments.
First of all, is fundamental to define some key terms, that will be discussed in this paper. The term “pressure” has been defined as “the presence of situational incentives for optimal, maximal, or superior performance” (Baumeister & Showers, 1986, p. 362). Pressure is increased when “the rewards for superior performance are high, when an evaluating audience is present, when competition is stiff, when the outcome of a performance is especially important and when there is only one chance to be successful” (Gallucci, 2014).
“Choking (under pressure)” is the term commonly used to describe a sub-optimal performance than expected, given what a performer is capable of doing or has done in the past, even if there is a high subjective intention to give the best. For this reasons, choking is defined as “the occurrence of inferior performance despite striving and incentives for superior performance” (Baumeister & Showers, 1986). For conceptual clarity is relevant to specify that choking is not a random fluctuation or an extended period of under-performance in skill level (Hill, Hanson, Matthews & Fleming, 2010), but a significant deterioration (Gucciardi & Dimmock, 2008) of the performance, in response to a high-pressure situation. It has an identifiable beginning and end, related to what the athlete perceives as a stressful situation (Beilock & Gray, 2007). In recent years, the definition has been expanded in “ a critical deterioration in skill execution leading to substandard performance that is caused by an elevation in anxiety levels under perceived pressure at a time when successful outcome is normally attainable by the athlete” (Mesagno & Mullane-Grant, 2010), to emphasise the element of increased anxiety, without which choking would not occur. All those elements allow distinguishing ”choking” from other forms of performance failures.
The goal of this essay is to illustrate the empirical evidence of choking under pressure, describe the theories that try to explain the underpinning mechanisms and provide ideas for possible interventions, applying everything to a real-case described by the media.
The athlete that we are going to considerate is Jana Novotna, a professional tennis player from the Czech Republic who has recently passed away. She was an outstanding champion. She won 100 tournaments, 3 Olympic medals and the Fed Cup with Czechoslovakia. In 1993, in the Wimbledon women’s tennis final, Novotna was leading the match in the third and final set against Steffi Graf. She seems in an undoubtedly winning position. Despite this, in those last set Novotna started failing her services, allowing Graf to win the final five sets, the match and the Grand Slam Title. After that, she won the women’s single title at Wimbledon in 1998 and many other competitions, giving other evidences in support to the consideration that her previous fail was just a case of choking.
510
Critical synthesis of empirical evidence (30% [~1000 words])
• Choking theories (distraction & self focus… link working memory and attention)
• Explanation of reinvestment theory and evidence for it
• Critical evaluation of the research (methods [sport type, questionnaires, performance measure] and results [key findings, contradictions, support]
• Critical discussion in relation to your example (this could link in to the bullet point above)
Different theories have tried to explain the phenomenon of choking under pressure and the reasons for which it occurs. Attentional Theories aim to explain the phenomenon of choking (under pressure) stating that pressure can have an impact on an individual’s working memory and attentional mechanisms (Beilock & Gray, 2007). In particular, two theories are related to this framework: Distraction and Self-focused Theories.
Distraction theories state that high-pressure situations induce anxiety in an individual, which induces worries about performing bad, occupying part of his working memory (Farrow, Baker & MacMahon, 2013). Working memory is a multicomponent memory system that maintain in an active state a small amount of relevant-task informations on ongoing processes (Engle & Kane, 2004). It is characterized for having a short duration (Peterson & Peterson, 1959) and a limited quantity capacity (Miller, 1956). In pressure situations, task-relevant cues and worries are processed at the same time, competing for the limited working memory capacities. This will result in a detrimental performance. Evidences can be found in several studies, mainly related to the impact of performance pressure on cognitive tasks (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001; Beilock, Kulp, Holt & Carr, 2004) and decision making in sporting environments (Burnett, Bishop, Ashford & Williams, 2017; Kinrade, Jackson & Ashford, 2015; Williams, Vickers & Rodriguez, 2002) .
Despite this, some motor skills do not relay too much on the working memory but still result affected by pressure. In accordance with Fitts and Posner Theory of learning (1967), within the skill acquisition the learner passes through different phases, placing different cognitive demands. During this progression, declarative knowledge of the motor skill is transformed into procedural knowledge, that do not require constant online attentional control, running largely outside of working memory (Beilock, Carr, MacMahon & Starkers, 2002). Self-focused theories give an explanation of why choking under pressure occurs also in relation to proceduralized skills. As said above, pressure situations create anxiety about performing correctly. Due to this worries, the focus of attention is shifted to skill execution, to exercise a more explicit monitoring of the movement (Beilock & Gray, 2007). Through this, a self evaluation process is started, that could lead to a paradoxical effect, called “paralysis by analysis”. As shown by the Reinvestment Theory (Masters & Maxwell, 2008), in pressure situations an expert performer will de-chunk automatised motor skills that normally occur outside of the conscious awareness into smaller independent units, in attempt to processing them in a conscious way. In this way he will act like a novice performer, breaking his motor ability in explicit segments he was taught at the beginning of his learning process. This will often lead to choking, slowing the performance and increasing the probabilities of errors. () Moreover, it has been shown that conscious control is not easily applicable online to proceduralised skills, they are faster to occur than to be analysed by our brain, so this focus of attention interfere with the sequencing and timing of the different motor components (Farrow et al., 2013). A vast range of researches support those theories. For example, studies have shown that if participants are required to focus on their movements while performing a prescribed motor skill, a detrimental effect in performance was shown, in comparison to a control group receiving different instructions (Jackson, Ashfors & Norsworthy, 2006; Gray, 2004).
Distraction and self-focus theories seem giving opposite explanations of the phenomenon of choking (too much vs not enough attention), but they could both have a role in explaining choking. In fact, as mentioned above, pressure causes worries that could reduce working memory capacity and shift at the same time the attention to motor execution (Beilock et al., 2004).
Masters et al 1993 have shown that individual differences in the tendency to reinvest are connected to different propensities of skill failures under pressure, assessing the differences through the Reinvestment Scale. Subsequently, the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale have been developed (Masters, Eves & Maxwell, 2005) , focusing on movement self-consciousness and conscious motor processing. To enlarge the understanding of choking from his motor component only, Kinrade Jackson Ashford Bishop 2010 developed the Decision Specific Reinvestment Scale, to enlight the cognitive side of the ability, the decision-making of skilled performance. DSRS asses the Decision Reinvestment (conscious monitoring of processes that produce decisions) and the Decision Rumination (propensity to focus upon past inaccurate decisions), taking into account both self-focus and distraction theories. DSRS was shown being the only predictor of changes in decision making accuracy under pressure (Kinrade Jackson Ashford Bishop 2010). In the sporting area, the relation between reinvestment and decision making under stress has received less interest than the impairment of motor control, but recently studies have been conducted among this topic. Researches related to this topic have been criticised for being mainly conducted in artificial settings, from video analysis of natural scenarios (Burnett, Bishop, Ashford & Williams, 2017) to video-based responses (Kinrade Jackson Ashford 2015; Jackson Ashford Bishop 2010); and for the difficulty in discerning effects of monitoring and distracting instructions, both having an effect on working memory resources (Wilson, Chattington, Marple-Horvat & Smith, 2007). Moreover, the studies related to the impairment of decision making under pressure seem mostly related to group situations, maybe because the decision making in group situations are more noticeable.
Taking into account the theories and the empirical evidences highlighted above, the case of Jana Novotna is investigated. This professional competed for a large monetary reward, in front of supportive (and neutral) crowd, all elements that has been shown as possibly increasing pressure (Baumeister 1984; Wallace, Baumeister & Vohs, 2005). The time of the match is also relevant: Novotna was almost at her last winning point when she started choking, that is in line with previous findings (MacGarry & Franks, 2000). The failure in her performance seems possibly related both to an exaggerate self-focus (internal monitoring or decision rumination) and/or by worries distraction, not being able to focus on the relevant-task informations, such as relevant cues in order to anticipate an opponent’s action (Loffing & Canal-Bruland, 2017). She repeatedly lost the ball, not being able to be on the right point of the pitch at the right time. She was not able to serve in correct point, losing the ball or frequently serving slow passes or too near to the opponent. We can not state if her individual characteristics are related to a predisposition of choking under pressure, but an adequate individual assessment should be useful for an intervention. A vast range of possible interventions has been developed in relation to choking under pressure.
Cognitive Behavioural interventions, Psychological consultancy sessions, Emotion regulation strategies and Simulations have been mainly used (Kent, Devonport, Lane, Nicholls & Friesen, 2018).
Cognitive Behavioural interventions consist in the development of abilities to obtain certain practical outcomes. In this scenario there could be strategies for gaining attentional control or developing coping abilities (Wood & Wilson, 2012). Psychological consultancy sessions are delivered by psychologists in clinical setting in order to learn how to deal with pressure through a deeper comprehension of the psychological processes and the individual motivations that can be related (Olusoga, 2014). Emotion regulation strategies aim to teach distraction or reappraisal strategies, to change the emotive perception of the situation (Moore 2015). Lastly, Simulations try to replicate the situation as close as possible, in order to get a certain experience and develop abilities to struggle the disruption of performance under pressure (Loarains, 2013).
Different ways of skills learning have also been suggested as a method to reduce the decrements of performing under pressure, such as Implicit Learning (e.g., Mullen, Hardy & Oldhan, 2007), Analogy Learning ( Liao & Masters, 2001) and Priming (e.g., Ashford & Jackson, 2010).
In relation to our case, a different way of learning is not recommended. The athlete taken into account is a professional at elite level, in an autonomous stage of learning, trying to promote a different learning of an already acquired skill could lead to disruption. It has been shown that trying to modify a pre-existing motor skill is difficult; the old motor pattern can not be totally exorcised and could automatically pop out, disrupting performance (Daffershofer & Week, 2004).
For this reason, instead of a re-learning of a pre-existing motor ability, an intervention that help to cope with pressure is recommended.
In the case of Novotna, Simulation interventions and Cognitive Behavioural interventions could be used.
The Simulation intervention would occur in an artificial environment, in order to introduce manipulations otherwise difficultly controllable in natural setting. It would consist in a virtual reality (VR) intervention. As known, videos could be criticised in terms of functionality of the task and action fidelity (Pinder, 20..?); for this reason the aim is to construct an environment as close as possible to the real one. VR has been used in Virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) for treating a variety of phobias and post traumatic stress disorders (e.g., Rothbaum, Anderson, Zimand, Hodges, Lang and Wilson, 2006; Powers & Emmelkamp, 2008).
The equipment would consist in a sport simulator, a large screen display, a VR visor, a remote console simulating a tennis racket and an open area for performing an interceptive response.
The intervention would lasts 5 weeks, 2 days a week, in order to modify the constraints and increase task difficulty (chow,2005), to maintain the optimal challenge point of the athlete ().
At the early begging, a pre-test of the decision-making abilities should be considered. The accuracy of the serve would be evaluated, in terms of the effectiveness in scoring a point (or at least the choice of a strategic point on the pitch) in relation to the opponent’s position. 10 serves versus an opponent should be taken into a natural setting, just after a training session, introducing a noisy crowd () and a money reward () in order to maintain physical fatigue conditions and psychological pressure that can occur in competition. In addition, after the completion of this test, participants should write down the elements they have taken into account in their decision to serve in a specific position (kindrade et al 2010).
To highlight the individual propensity to reinvestment, a DSRS scale would be administered.
As maintaining one’s level of performance under pressure is the central point of this intervention, elements such as the crowd(), monetary reward() and the time of the match () would be manipulated. In week 5 all the manipulations would be summed, in order to obtain a situation similar to a Wimbledon final event. To assess the effectiveness of the manipulations the state anxiety will be tested with the Competitive Sport Anxiety Inventory-2 Revised (CSAI-2R) (Cox, Martens et al. 2003) throughout the study. After each condition they should also rate the pressure felt (article).
Temporal occlusion would be used, in order to stop the video at different time point, to modulate the difficulty level of the choice. In fact, task difficulty has been shown as one of the main modulator of choking (task difficulty evidences).
Visual search behaviour would be tested with a head-mounted display, in order to understand if the participant is looking at the right elements for taking a decision, but can not use them (Wilson, M. R., Vine, S. J., and Wood, G. 2009).
After the 5 week intervention, a post test in lab would be conducted and a transfer test in the field would be administered. 10 serves should be performed both in video and in natural setting, evaluated as in the pre test.
A second possible intervention would be a Cognitive Behavioural intervention (CBT). CBT is nowadays commonly used in sport psychology to turn dysfunctional performance-related behaviours into functional behaviours ( Gustafsson, H, Lundqvist, C and Tod, D (2016) . As rumination and imagery has shown to be the two main processes related to disruption under pressure, the ability to cope with those automatic processes is fundamental (). The aim is not to exorcise anxiety, positive under certain levels () , but to develop strategies for proficently deal with it.
A study conducted by Didymus and Fletcher 2017) has shown cognitive restructuring as an effective strategy in dealing with performance under pressure.
An intervention of 8 session, 2 per week, should be developed. As CBT is a specific form of Psychological Treatment, a standard procedure for the intervention cannot be assessed. Otherwise, a generic guideline can be described.
Firstly, a relationship-building and behavioural analysis should be conducted(). A semi-structured interview and the DSRS should be assessed, in order to made a pre-test. Secondly, through the collaboration between consultant and client, the external and internal triggers of anxiety in competition should be individuated (Didymus, Fletcher, 2017). A frequently used strategy is to develop an exposure hierarchy, consisting in a list of stimulus causing anxiety. Those item should be evaluated through the Subjective Units of Discomfort Scale (SUDS, Abramowitz et al 2011).
After that, the understanding of the behavioural responses of the client should be assessed and the short and long therm consequences of avoidance or choking behaviour should be discussed in the therapeutical session().
The third phase would be connected to develop an understanding of the physiological processes eliciting to anxiety, to highlight the organic, normal, nature of this responses (Abramowitz, Deacon & Whiteside, 2011). Moreover, cognitive restructuring techniques should be taught in this phase. Cognitive restructuring consist in identifying negative think-distortions and modifying them(). For example, the athlete could be convinced of being not enough because he has lost a previous match, and should be awarded of this disruption in the thought, because the fact that he is competing at an elite level is actually a prove of his “being enough”. The usable strategies are many and modifiable in relation to the characteristics of the client (Ryska,1988).
The last phase should consists in practicing the learned techniques during sport performance().
A post test intervention should be conducted, repeating the semistructured interview and the DSRS after three months from the intervention, due to the retention period (Didymus, Fletcher, 2017).
These are just two of the possible interventions applicable in relation to a modulation of the effect of chocking at an individual level.