No abstract

Choking under pressure describes suboptimal sport performance in stressful situations, which has led to two fundamental 'choking' models: distraction and self-focus. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of empirical studies that have tested interventions used to alleviate choking. The systematic review includes 47 empirical studies published up to April 2017, including experimental, quasi-experimental, and single-case studies with athletes. These studies encompassed a variety of interventions (n = 13) that were either distraction based or self-focus based. In addition, a third group -acclimatisation interventions -was identified. The results indicate that, in general, choking interventions based on both choking models and on acclimatisation provide a benefit to performance under pressure. The most reported effective interventions were pre-performance routines, quiet eye training, left-hand contractions, and acclimatisation training. The use of dual task was beneficial for performance under pressure but harmful when used in training. Mixed evidence was found for analogy learning, and null effects were reported for goal setting, neurofeedback training, and reappraisal cues. These results may help athletes and coaches select and implement effective strategies and methods to improve performance under pressure. ARTICLE HISTORY

Collective team collapse occurs when multiple players of a sport team experience a sudden and extreme underperformance within a game. To date, minimal research has been conducted on the causes of collective team collapse. Thus, goals of this study were to explore perceived causes of collective team collapse in different sports and to define team collapse in contrast to negative momentum. To investigate factors causing and maintaining collective sport team collapse, an inductive, exploratory qualitative analysis of individual interviews was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 10 athletes of professional German teams of various sports playing in between first and fourth division. Participants were interviewed about a team collapse event they had experienced with their team during the past year. Data were collected and analyzed using a grounded theory methodology. Collective team collapse appeared to be induced by a temporal cascade of causes rather than by single triggers. This cascade included antecedents, which represent factors that make the occurrence of a team collapse more likely; critical events, which include specific events within the game that trigger a team collapse; as well as affective, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes that foster a maintenance of the collapse. Within this theoretical framework, social factors, such as decreased performance contagion or emotional contagion, played crucial roles in causing a team collapse. These results illustrate that collective team collapse is more than the sum of individual choking of multiple players at the same time. In conclusion, a new definition, differentiating team collapse from negative momentum, is introduced. Furthermore, a process model of causes of collective team collapse is proposed. The results provide first insights into causes of collective collapse in a variety of team sports. The developed model is supposed to help future research to better connect to practice and to support athletes, coaches, and sport psychologists.

“Choking under pressure” is a maladaptive response to performance pressure whereby choking models have been identified, yet, theory-matched interventions have not empirically tested. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether a preperformance routine (PPR) could reduce choking effects, based on the distraction model of choking. Three “choking-susceptible”, experienced participants were purposively sampled, from 88 participants, to complete ten-pin bowling deliveries in a single-case A1-B1-A2-B2 design (A phases = “low-pressure”; B phases = “high-pressure”), with an interview following the single-case design. Participants experienced “choking” in the B1 phase, which the interviews indicated was partially due to an increase in self-awareness (S-A). During the B2 phase, improved accuracy occurred when using the personalized PPR and, qualitatively, positive psychological outcomes included reduced S-A and decreased conscious processing. Using the personalized PPR produced adaptive and relevant, task-focused attention.

2016-12-24T18:18:19