foundations of sport and exercise psychology

Gill’s definition

sport psychology is the study of people and their behaviours in sport and exercise and the practical application of that knowledge

difference between sport psychology and exercise psychology

sport psychology - working with people already in sport

exercise psychology - work in gyms (for example), maybe trying to figure out why people do not exercise

who might sport psychologist work with?

pro athletes

coaches

umpires

‘ordinary’ people

(i.e. anyone)

example of a theory

flow state

flow state

optimal levels of concentration & anxiety. best for performance

an early sport psychology experiment

Norman Tripplett (1898)

Tripplett (1898)

• carried out much research in to pacing and competition in cyclists → found that cyclists perform best in groups (competitive instinct?, crowd?)

• conducted fishing reel study to prove his theory → those in pairs were better than those on their own → social facilitation effect

theoretical approaches to motivation

• self-determination theory

• achievement goal theory

• attribution theory

social facilitation theory

when performing simple or familiar tasks, an audience enhances performance. Opposite is true if the task is unfamiliar and/or complex (Zajone)

achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1989)

focuses on how we define success and failure

& focuses on dispositional factors → characteristics which effect behaviour/actions, no consideration of environment

achievement goal orienations

• task-mastery operations

• ego orientation

task-mastery orientations

focus on improvement; comparing our ability/competence to our own past experiences; understand it is progressive

ego orientation

motivated by social comparison; want to be able to perform as well as others without putting in as much effort → trying to demonstrate superiority

current ability is important; no care for a process, only outcome → allows peers to catch up to their ability (individuals in ego orientation are less likely to persist

may stop trying when things don’t go well because then they can say ‘I didn’t lose, I just wasn’t trying, I would have won if I tried’

task goal orientation vs ego orientation

• task goal → linkedd to adaptive achievment strategies (e.g. persistence in practice); more likely to challenge and stretch their ability (within reason); WHEREAS, ego goal more likely to take the easy option to look good

• task goal → positively related to sportsmanlike behaviours (e.g. fair play); WHEREAS, ego goal → want to win at all costs; could cheat or injure others in order to reach their goal

• task goal → adaptive outcomes; ego goal → maldaptive outcomes

4 goal profiles

high task, low ego → ‘I just go out & play, I don’t really care if I win or lose’

high task, high ego → ‘It’s about performing to the best of your ability, being competitive and hungry, and learning about why you might have won or lost on that particular day’

low task, high ego → ‘sport is just about winning, no more, no less, no-one looks at how well you played’

low task, low ego → low perception of their ability

behaviours/ tendencies in each

high task, low ego → low anxiety (not focused on others), high enjoyment

high task, high ego → focus on winning or what it takes to win; uses feedback constructively

low task, low ego → anxiety (fear others being better than them); focus on winning

low task, low ego → disinterested, low perceived effort

individual difference in achievement goals

• goal orienations are not independent of one antoher (orthogonal) → can fit into both, can be neither

• someone who is high ego does not necessarily need to try and reduce this; more likely need to work on increasing task goal orientation; adaptive outcomes can counteract the maldaptive

motivational climate ( Ames, 1992)

situational factors → based on the environment you find yourself in

two climates

mastery (task-involving) climate

performance (ego-involving) climate

mastery (task-involving) climate

environment is focused on individual improvement, effort and cooperative learning

performance (ego-involving) climate

highlighted by competition, outperforming others, viewing mistakes as failures and achieving success with minimal effort

effect of being in a task climate

likely to change a persons orientation over time as they begin to see more of these cues

TARGET framework

Tasks

Authority

Recognition

Grouping

Evaluation

Time

Tasks

mastery - challenging and diverse

performance - absence of variety and challenge

authority

mastery - students are given choices & leadership roles

performance - students do not take part in decision-making process

recognition

mastery - private & based on individual process

performance - public and based on social comparison

grouping

mastery - promotion of cooperative learning and peer interaction

performance - groups are formed on the basis of ability

evaluation

mastery - based on mastery of tasks and on individual performance

performance - based on winning or out-performing others

time

mastery - time requirements are adjusted to personal capabilities

performance - time allocated for learning is uniform to all students

attributions

how people explain their behaviour → may not be the actual cause but perceived to be the cause

Weiner’s attribution model

attributions fall into 4 categories

attributions fall into 4 categories

• ability

• effort

• task difficulty

• luck

4 tasks fall under 2 dimensions

locus of causality:

• internal → effects self-esteem more (ability, effort, fitness, concentration)

• external → (luck, weather, refereeing, opponent)

stability

is the cause likely to change over time?

stable → raw ability, failure = expect future failure, unlikely to change

unstable → effort, luck, mood; likely to change

weiner summary

locus of causality:

internal factors - under the control of the performer (ability and effort)

external factors - beyond performers control (task difficulty and luck)

stability:

stable factors - fixed factors; don’t change over time (ability and task difficulty)

unstable factors - vary with time (effort and luck)

high achievers vs low achievers

high achievers → attribute success internally, failure is attributed to external factors (improves self esteem)

low achievers → opposite

how is the Basic Needs Theory measured

Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction & Frustration Scale (BPNSNF)

how organismic integration theory is measured

revised sport motivation scale

how ego orientation and task orientation can be measured

Task & Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ)

self-esteem

personal judgement of worthiness that reflects the degree to which an individual feels positive about themselves

self-concept vs self-esteem

self-concept = what we know about ourselves; can be broken down into different dimensions

self-esteem = how we feel about ourselves

athletes with poor self-esteem

• rely on how they are doing in the present → unstable self-esteem = unstable performance

• success fails to heighten self-esteem

• attribute negative events internally and are less resilient

• failure has an impact on future performances

athletes with high self-esteem

• future performances less affected by failure → able to perform more consistently

• accept and value themselves as worthy

qualities associated with high and low self esteem

high → independence, leadership, adaptability, resilience

low → anxious, depressed, fearful

self-confidence

a belief about your ability to be successful

factor most consistently distinguishing highly successful from less successful athletes

trait vs state self confidence

trait → how confident you are in your ability in general (consistent and stable)

state → how confident you feel right now (temporary and unstable)

self-confidence in sport

self-confidence is multidimensional

in sport:

• belief in ability to achieve

• belief in superiority over opposition

benefits of self-confidence

high expectancy of success

facilitates concentration

affects goals

increases effort

affects game strategies

affects psychological momentum

optimal self-confidence

being so confident that you can achieve your goal you’ll strive so hard to do so

confidence can not overcome incompetence

each person has a different optimal level

performance problems if self-confidence is far off optimal

lack of confidence causes…

negative thinking

negative attitude

likely to give up

avoid challenges

focused on outcome

bigger picture → anxiety, depression, indecisiveness

optimal confidence causes…

effective thinking

positive attitude

persistent; overcome failure

welcome challenges

focus on mastery

overconfidence

inflated confidence:

believe they are better than they are

fail to prepare

or

false confidence:

faking confidence

lack competence

dealing with overconfidence

take competition seriously

respect opposition

self-fulfilling prophecy

prediction that sets in motion a series of events that causes original prediction to come true

can be negative or positive

self-efficacy

perception of one’s ability to perform a task successfully in a specific situation

self-efficacy theory

adoption and persistence in behaviour are determined by

• self efficacy expectancy → expectations about skill in the specific situation

• outcome expectancy

• outcome value → the value placed on an outcome

sources of self-efficacy

• performance accomplishments (strongest source of self-efficacy)

• vicarious experience

• verbal persuasion

• imaginal experience (positive imagery)

• physiological states (arousal can be facilitative or debilitative)

• emotional states