Sports Psych Review

9.1 Theories of Motivation

• Self Efficacy (Bandura)– Beliefs in own competence– Influenced by 4 factors• Previous experience• Modelling• Verbal persuasion, encouragement• Interpretation of emo/physio arousal

Self Efficacy Research

• Hochstetler et al (1985)– 40 female cyclists• Grp 1: video of struggles, then task• Grp 2: video of success, then same task• Grp 1 found task much harder• Evidence for impact of modeling

Self Efficacy Research (cont.)

• Feltz et al (1989)– Field study, hockey team– S-E correlated to team performance and increases

as season progresses– Evidence for previous experience

• Bandura and Banfield (1991)– Belief in EFFORT more than talent develops high S-

E

Eval Self Efficacy

strengths• Successfully applied• Empirically studied• Strong predictor of

performance

limits• Must be combined with

other factors• Some studies are only

correlational

Competence Motivation Theory

• Harter (1978)– Feelings of COMPETENCE are the primary factors

in motivation– “Perceived Competence” predicts:• Cognitive outcomes (S-E, Control)• Affective outcomes (enjoy, anxiety)• Behavioral outcomes (performance)

Competence Motivation Theory

• Challenging/realistic goals increase motivation• Unsuccessful attempts result in perceived

failure, decrease motivation• Positive feedback helps raise perceived

competence

Competence Motivation Research

• Ommundsen et al (1991)– 223 Norwegian male soccer players age 14-16

interviewed– Low competence, low peer popularity = low

persistence, low connection to team and low enjoyment

– All resulted in low motivation

9.2 Role of Goal Setting

• 3 types of goals– Outcome goals (ego goals): focus on winning– Performance goals (task goals): focus on individual

performance– Process goals: focus on skill improvement

Achievement Goal Theory

• Nichols (1984)– One’s internal sense of ability (task vs ego) is the

central motivating factor– Task: skill mastery, high intrinsic motivation– Ego: win, low intrinsic motivation, higher

stress/pressure and social comparison

Goal Setting Research

• Filby et al (1999)– Field experiment, soccer for 5 weeks– Grp 1: no goals– Grp 2: outcome goals– Grp 3: process goals– Grp 4: outcome and process goals– Grp 5: outcome, performance and process goals– Results: grps 4 and 5 outperformed others

• Ntoumanis et al (1999)– Task: better problem solvers, coping strategies and

social support– Ego: emotion focused problem solvers, negative

feelings, increased concern over personal mistakes

4 Reasons Why Goal Work

• 1. Goals direct attention• 2. Goals help energize• 3. Goals affect persistence• 4. Goals lead to the discovery of strategies of

achievement

9.3 Arousal, Anxiety and Performance

• Gould (2000)– Athletic performance reflects close coordination

between mind and body– Arousal: physio activity– Anxiety: negative emotional state• Cognitive: negative thoughts• Somatic: body’s stress reaction• State: apprehension, nervousness• Trait: perceived threat when none exists

The Inverted U Theory

• Yerkes-Dodson Law (1908)

Inverted U Research

• Oxendine (1970)– Nature of skill affects optimal arousal levels

• Klavora (1998)– 95 male HS basketball players– Pregame anxiety measured by test– Results: moderate pregame anxiety was better

than high/low anxiety for optimal performance

• (Fazey & Hardy, 1988) Catastrophe Model• When anxiety level exceeds the optimal level

drop in performance is dramatic, not gradual

Eval Inverted U

strengths• Successful application in

sports• Predictive value• Can help explain poor

performance

limits• No clear explanation as to

why this happens• Too general• Does not account for

individual factors• Theory can clearly explain

the origin of arousal• Does not account for S-E

and other cognitive factors

Optimal Arousal Theory (IZOF)

• Hanin (1997): Top athletes have own, individual zone of optimal anxiety (IZOF)

• IZOF is unique to all athletes• When arousal level and cognitive anxiety level

meet result is peak performance

IZOF Research

• Raglin & Morris ((1994)– College V-ball players reached IZOF vs high quality

opponents but not vs low quality opponents– Evidence for upsets in competition

• Amnesi (1998)– 3 elite tennis players, established IZOF for each

and taught anxiety reduction techniques– All showed increased performance

Eval Optimal Arousal (IZOF)

Strengths• Successfully applied in

sports• Empirically supported• Numerous examples at all

levels of sport

limits• Very time consuming to

establish IZOF• IZOF is a moving target• IZOF is dependent on

numerous uncontrolled variables

• Cannot explain why IZOF is not necessary at all times

9. 4 Techniques for Skill Development in Sport

Massed Practice• Continuous• Used to train “discrete

tasks”: free throw, golf swing etc…

• Goal: accurate and automatic performance under pressure

• Variable practice is a combination of both; helps increase motivation

Distributed Practice• Interval• Used to train “continuous

tasks”: swimming, cycling etc…

• Utilizes modeling, repetition and feedback

Massed vs Distributed Research

Singer (1965)• Massed vs Distributed

practice in basketball• Grp 1: massed (80 shots)• Grp 2: distributed (4 x 20

shots, 5 min rest)• Grp 3:distributed (4 x 20

shots, 24 hr rest)• 2 tests over 4 days• Results: practice with rest

shows best results

Lee & Genovese (1988)• Meta analysis of 116 studies• Distributed found to be

BETTER than massed for motor skills in both MASTERY of skill and PERFORMANCE

ImageryThe brain uses the same neural mechanisms to imagine movements as it does with actual

movements.

• Monroe et al (2000)– Where used: pre-

competition– When used: during

practice and competition– Why used: promote

confidence and S-E– What is used: positive

images, emotions

• Martin et al (1999)– Applied Imagery Model

• Cognitive specific: imagine the skill

• Cognitive general: imagine strategy

• Motivational specific: enhancing motivation

• Motivational arousal: regulating stress

• Motivational general mastery: staying focused

Imagery (cont.)

• Moritz et al (1996)– Studied the relationship

between imagery & confidence

– Elite athletes use imagery related to mastery and emotion

– Correlational study

• Callow & Hardy (2001)– 123 female netball

players– Studied the relationship

between imagery & confidence

– Low skilled players: motivational general mastery imagery

– High skilled: goal achievement imagery

Eval Imagery

strengths• Powerful technique• Empirically demonstrated• Supported by neuroimaging

studies• Relates to S-E and

performance

Limits• Not effective for all • Low confidence = imagined

failure• Validity issues with self

reporting results

9.5 Role of Coaches

• Horn & Lox (1993) Self-fulfilling Prophecy– Coach forms expectations– Expectations affect treatment of athlete– Different treatment influences perceptions of

competence– Athlete’s behavior\performance conforms to

expectations

Coaching Behavior and Expectations

• Weinberg & Gould (2007)– Categories based on high or low expectations• Frequency/quality of coach-athlete interaction: more

given to “best” players• Quantity/quality of instruction: better teaching for

“best” players• Type/frequency of feedback: better, more timely for

“best” players

Role of Coaches ResearchChase et al (1997) Coaches’ efficacy beliefs and team performance

• 4 D-III women’s b-ball coaches, questionnaire– High efficacy expectations

were reinforced by good preparation

– Efficacy expectations were linked to skills

– Coaches should focus on self-improvement and effort (controllable factors)

Alfermann et al (2005) Coaches’ influence on skill development

• How do leadership styles (Democratic vs Autocratic) and feedback impact skills?

• Study 1: 119 swimmers, questionnaires, 1 year– D = mastery climate, positive

relationship to performance

• Study 2: 212 youth athletes (individual and team), questionnaires– Team sports require more group

oriented behavior from coach

9.6 Team Cohesion and Performance

• 4 factors of cohesion– 1. Individual factors: player identification with

team– 2. Team factors: communication, goals, efficacy– 3. Leadership factors: culture, collective

responsibility– 4. Environmental Factors: size of group, pressure

to perform

Cohesion ResearchCarron et al (1985) Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ)

• GEQ measures:• Task cohesion: commitment

to work together to achieve specific goals

• Social cohesion: like and enjoy playing together and supporting each other

Carron et al (2002) Relationship between cohesion and performance

• 294 Canadian b-ball and soccer players given the GEQ– Results: strong relationship

between TASK cohesion and success

– TASK cohesion helps raise team efficacy, enhancing performance

9.7 Aids/Barriers to Cohesion

Aids• Team Building, focus on team spirit

and identity, player satisfaction• Focus on performance and process

goals for collective efficacy: common goals, ownership

• Democratic leadership style: open and approachable with players

• Clear communication: consistent communication on goals, roles and feedback

Barriers• Weinberg & Gould (2008)

– Personality clashes– Conflict between task and

social roles– Communication breakdown– Power struggle– Frequent turnover of group

members– Disconnect on goals

9.8 Response to Stress/Injury

• Stress process in sport– Stressors: overtraining, injury, bad grades,

coach/team drama, external expectations, competition

– Stress Response: Arousal (somatic and psychological), anxiety, cognitive appraisal

– Coping: Emotion vs Problem Focused coping strategies (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984)

Two Approaches to StressHolmes & Rahe (1967) Major Life Events

• Rating scale for life event (job change, death of a loved one, divorce etc…)

• Adapted for use in sports (problems with coach or teammate etc…)

Lazarus & Folkman (1984) Cognitive Appraisal

• Athlete’s perception to situation in relation to coping resources is key to behavior– Imbalance between own

abilities and demands results in negative feelings; balance results in positive feelings

Athlete Response to Stress

• Gould (1993) Coping strategies in elite athletes to manage stress– Olympic wrestlers and National Champ figure

skaters, questionnaires about managing stress– Results found 4 dimensions of coping themes:• 1. Thought control: self talk, positive thinking• 2. Attention control: concentration cues• 3. Behavioral control: fixed routines• 4. Emotional control: relaxation and visualization

Two Hypotheses on Role of Stress and Injury

• 1. Stress disrupts attention– Poor attention leads to increased risk of injury

• 2. Stress produce increased muscle tension and reduces coordination– Reduced coordination leads to higher risk of injury– Anderson & Williams (1999): negative life event

stressors were the only significant predictor of injury in 196 college athletes

Cognitive Appraisal Model(Wiese, Bjornstal, 1998)

• Primary Appraisal: what is at stake, challenge, threat, benefit or loss

• Secondary Appraisal: how can you cope, options available

Athlete Response to Chronic Injury

• Shuer et al (1997)– Aim: psych and coping responses to chronic injury– 280 elite college athletes, measured coping

responses, intrusive thoughts and avoidance coping

– Results: chronically injured athletes scored highest on avoidance coping with females scoring higher than males, indicating high rates of denial

9.1 Reasons for Using Drugs in Sport

• Goldman (1984)– Asked 198 elite athletes if they would take a

“magic drug” that would allow them to win gold w/out being caught

– 98% said yes; 52% said yes even if it would kill them in 5 years

• Physical reasons– Enhance performance– Cope with pain/taining– Control wieght– Develop strength/stamina

• Psychological reasons– Control emotions– Control stress response– Build self confidence– Gain mental edge

• Social reasons– Pressure from coaches/parents to perform– Peer pressure and need for acceptance– Financial concerns—scholarships, prize money,

bonuses

Research on Drug Use

Anshel (1991)• Survey of 126 US athletes

from 9 sports• 64% aware of use on team• 43% knew drugs were to

enhance performance• Drugs taken for physical &

psych reasons

Wadler & Hainline (1989)• Athletes may be more likely

to experiment w/drugs due to 5 factors

• 1. pressure to reach next level

• 2. careers are finite• 3. weight is always an issue• 4. injury is always an issue• 5. external pressure always

exists

• Smith et al (2010)• Narrative based case study of 11 Aussie athletes– Said use of drugs was cheating, attitudes were

shaped by:• 1. legality of drug• 2. drug’s impact on performance• 3. early sporting experience/culture• 4. commercial pressures• 5. Individual desire to use• 6. existing use of drug within the sport

Game Theory

• Why would rational athletes decide to take drugs?

• “Prisoner’s Dilemma”

Applied Game Theory: Tour De France

• Shermer (2008)– Payoff is high, motivation to use drugs increases– Some cyclists take drugs, win and aren’t caught– Other cyclists see this and follow suit– Penalties are stiff so a “code of silence” reigns– Climate is such that if you don’t use, you can’t

even compete– Riis, Ulrich, Contador, Landis, Armstrong all won

and have tested positive in last 20 years

9.10 Effects of Drug Use in Sport

• WADA makes the list of banned substances based on classifications– PED’s: steroids, EPO, HGH etc…– Recreational: alcohol, cocaine, marijuana etc…Consequences for using

Legal: prison, finesEthical: banned from competing, stripped of

wins, titles etc…Health Issues: side effects, addiction

Effects of Steroids

• Synthetic version of testosterone that stays in blood longer

• Bio Effects: increased muscle, increase # red blood cells, shrinking testes, sterility, “masculinizing effect”, risk of heart disease, kidney and liver problems, cancers

• Psych Effects: increased aggression (debatable) and impulsivity, mood swings

Steroid Research

• Olrich • (1999) Athletes perceptions of steroid effects– Interviews with 10 bodybuilders, 5 had stopped

using– Only 1 reported side effects or guilt– All reported psychological addiction– All reported short term side effects are not a

deterrent

• Case Study: Heidi Krieger (Andreas Krieger)– Victim of East German doping program from age 16– By 18 she weighed 220lbs with masculinization

effects and mood swings, aggression and problems with sexual identity

– Career ended with knee, hip and back injuries and she became clinically depressed and considered suicide

– Had a sex change operation and is now known as Andreas Krieger

9.11 Causes and Prevention of Burnout

• Smith (1986): Characteristics of Burnout– Physical/emotional exhaustion– Feelings of low accomplishment– Depersonalization, apathy for sport– Detected by:• Maslach Burnout Inventory• Athlete Burnout Questionnaire (ABQ)

Cognitive-Affective Stress Model (Smith 1986)

• How thoughts and feelings influence athlete’s burnout– Stage 1: Situation Demands: demands exceed

resources = stress– Stage 2: Cognitive Appraisal: threat vs. challenge

appraisal of situation = anxious or excited– Stage 3: Physiological Responses: fight or flight due

to appraisal– Stage 4: Behavioral Response: performance issues,

cohesion problems, withdrawal

Burnout Research

• Gould (1996, 97)• Longitudinal study of tennis players found a

number of personal & situational factors in burnout– Physical concerns– Logistical concerns– Social/interpersonal concerns– Psychological concernsResults indicated a combination of social and psych stressors along with external demands contributed to burnout

Investment Model of Burnout(Entrapment Theory)

• Raedeke (1997)– Assumes athletes consider costs and benefits of

their sport– Burnout results from the imbalance between

perceived costs and benefits– Commitment based on enjoyment: sport is

rewarding of itself—no burnout– Commitment based on entrapment: sport is

unsatisfying of itself—high burnout risk

Burnout Prevention

– Cognitive Affective Stress Management Training (Smith, 1980) SMT• Mental/physical coping strategies designed to prevent

burnout in 4 steps– Pre-treatment Assessment: interviews to assess the athlete’s

stress response and appraisal– Treatment Rationale: athlete analyzes and gains

understanding of personal stress reactions– Skill Acquisition: athlete learns relaxation, cognitive

restructuring and self talk– Skill Rehearsal: stress is induced to allow athlete to practice

new stress reducing skills

• Stress Inoculation Theory (SIT) Meichenbaum, 1985– Athlete is exposed to increasing levels of stress in

3 stages, thereby enhancing his/her immunity “Learned Resourcefulness”

– Stage 1: Conceptualization: athlete becomes aware of +/-- thoughts, self talk, imagery

– Stage 2: Rehearsal: practice– Stage 3: Application: athlete encounters low stress

and then moves up to moderate then high and applies what was rehearsed in stage 2

– Prepare--control--cope--evaluate--overcome