intentional concentration is called “hyperaccessibility” and is especially likely to occur
under conditions of mental load. Clearly, there are many situations in sport in which such
ironic self-regulation failures occur. For example, issuing a negative command to your
doubles partner in tennis (such as “whatever you do, don’t double-fault”) may produce
counter-intentional results. What theoretical mechanisms could account for this
phenomenon?
According to Wegner (1994), when people try to suppress a thought, they engage in a
controlled (conscious) search for thoughts that are different from the unwanted thought.
At the same time, however, our minds conduct an automatic (unconscious) search for any
signs of the unwanted thought. In other words, the intention to suppress a thought
activates an automatic search for that very thought in an effort to monitor whether or not
the act of suppression has been successful. Normally, the conscious intentional system
dominates the unconscious monitoring system. But under certain circumstances (e.g.,
when our working memories are overloaded or when our attentional resources are
depleted by fatigue or stress), the ironic system prevails and an ironic intrusion of the
unwanted thought occurs. Wegner attributes this rebound effect to cognitive load. But
although this load is believed to disrupt the conscious mechanism of thought control, it
does not interfere with the automatic (and ironic) monitoring system. Thus Wegner
(1994) proposed that “the intention to concentrate creates conditions under which mental
load enhances monitoring of irrelevancies” (p. 7). To summarise, Wegner’s (1994)
research helps us to understand why athletes may find it difficult to suppress unwanted or
irrelevant thoughts when they are tired or anxious.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Wegner (2002) has investigated ironies of action as well as
those of thought. For example, consider what happens when people who are asked not to
overshoot the hole in a golf putt are given tasks which impose a heavy mental load on
them. In such situations, the unwanted action (overshooting the hole) is exactly what
happens.
Interestingly, the ironic theory of mental control has begun to attract attention within
sport psychology (e.g., see a review paper by Janelle, 1999). Furthermore, it has also
received empirical support from research within this field. For example, Dugdale and
Eklund (2002) asked participants to watch a series of videotapes of Australian Rules
footballers, coaches and umpires. In one experiment, results revealed that participants
became more aware of the umpires when instructed not to pay attention to them. Clearly,
this finding raises doubts about the validity of asking anxious athletes not to worry about
an important forthcoming athletic event or outcome.
At this stage, it might be helpful to do some research on distractions. So, if you are
interested in exploring the factors that cause athletes to lose their focus, try the exercise in
Box 4.3.
Box 4.3 Exploring distractions in sportThe purpose of this exercise is two-fold. First, you will find out what the term
“concentration” means to athletes. In addition, you will try to classify the distractions
which they perceive to have affected their performance.
To begin with find three athletes who compete regularly in different sports (e g golf
Staying focused in sport: concentration in sport performers 111