This review of research dealing with psychologically induced arousal and motor performance focuses on the hypothesized inverted-∪ function relating arousal to performance. The inverted-∪ hypothesis is supported only in a weak and psychologically trivial fashion: Subjects with incentive will outperform either those with none or those responding to a serious and plausible threat; the arousal level of the first group will be intermediate to those of the other two. However, debilitating states (e.g., anxiety) can occur at arousal levels equal to that optimal for performance (the state of being “psyched up”). The concept of arousal cannot distinguish between these and other states (e.g., anger, sexuality, and fear) because it is an excessively broad physiological construct artificially severed from its psychological context. More useful research in human motor performance would investigate discrete psychobiological states, which include affect and cognition as well as physiology. Examination of profound individual differences in response to incentive and threat suggests that psychobiological states have their genesis in response expectancies and hypnotic-like self-inductions. The cognitive and affective components of these states are highly interactive and perhaps not profitably separated. Because performance anxiety is a central problem in the motor realm, it is carefully delineated and the test anxiety literature is scrutinized. Psychophysiological test batteries and other investigations in the area are described, and guidelines for future research are provided.

The unsuitability of global arousal as an explanatory construct has been documented for more than a third of a century (Neiss, 1988a). Anderson's (1990 critique attempted to justify continued use of the arousal construct, principally by citing her group's theorizing and research. This reply counters Anderson's argument that cognitive performance and the effects of drugs are best conceptualized in terms of arousal by analyzing this research program. It is proposed that the theorizing presented by Anderson ignores affect by separating mind and body. The empirical studies cited in support of this theory generally fail to assess arousal, and interpret widely varying patterns of results as supportive of the theory, nearly precluding falsifiability.

We investigated the nature of psychological responses to the threat of nuclear war and the relationships between attitudes and behavior in three studies. The first was a quasi‐experimental study of the effects of a film depiction of nuclear war on attitudes and behavior. Results suggested that exposure was mediated by a sense of control over political events, but that exposure itself had no significant effect on psychological responses to nuclear war. The second was an experimental investigation of the effects of efficacy enhancing, fear arousing, or informational tactics as well as individual differences on memory for relevant information and political activism on the issue of nuclear arms control. Results indicated that men exposed to the fear arousal tactic were less likely to take action than those exposed to information alone or efficacy enhancement, whereas women exposed to fear arousal were more likely to act. Gender differences are explained in terms of the socialization of male responses to fear, the “macho” response. Those who showed less denial were more likely to act, as were those who stated intentions to take action. The third study employed structural modeling to examine the relationships between attitudes and behavior. Results supported the Model of Reasoned Action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) in showing that intentions to act mediated the relationship between attitudes and behavior on this issue.

This paper argues that recent developments in the understanding of psychobiological states may help to explain individual differences in susceptibility to addiction. It points out that the construct of arousal is deficient for this purpose and that a more fruitful approach views humans as bundles of state-dependent selves, strongly affected by self-efficacy and response expectancies. Coping skills, enhancement behaviors, and other state-regulating techniques are seen as crucial to liability to chemical dependency and the social learning underlying their genesis is explored. Under this view drug experiences are held to be analogous to hypnotic inductions and psychological approaches to therapy could usefully focus on helping addicts develop a metaperspective on the succession of psychobiological states.

No abstract