Sport And Exercise Psychology: A Critical Introduction

Although the preceding anecdotal examples are useful in highlighting the importance
of arousal control to athletes, they do not illuminate the relationship between anxiety and
performance. Fortunately, there is a considerable empirical research literature on this
topic (e.g., see reviews by Gould et al., 2002; Zaichkowsky and Baltzell, 2001). Let us
now evaluate the main theories and findings emerging from this research literature.

Theories of arousal/anxiety-performance relationships

Since the early 1900s, a considerable amount of psychological research has been
conducted on the relationship between people’s arousal levels and their subsequent
performance on skilled tasks. In general, this research has been influenced by four main
theories: “Drive theory” (based on Hull, 1943); the “inverted-U” hypothesis (based on
Yerkes and Dodson, 1908); more recently, “catastrophe theory” (e.g., Hardy, 1990, 1996;
Hardy and Parfitt, 1991); and the “conscious processing” hypothesis (Masters, 1992).
Although the earlier theories (e.g., drive theory, the “inverted-U” hypothesis) applied
mainly to arousal-performance relationships, the more recent ones (e.g., catastrophe
theory, the “conscious processing” hypothesis) deal more with anxiety-performance
relationships. Details of other approaches such as the “individual zones of optimal
functioning” hypothesis (Hanin, 1997) and “reversal theory” (Kerr, 1997) may be found
in Gould et al. (2002) and Zaichkowsky and Baltzell (2001).

Drive theory

In learning theory, a “drive” is regarded as a psychological state of arousal that is created
by an imbalance in the homeostatic mechanisms of the body and that impels the organism
to take ameliorative action. In general, two types of drives have been identified
(Cashmore, 2002). Primary drives arise from the pursuit of basic biological needs such as
eating, drinking and restoring homeostasis (or the internal equilibrium of the body).
Secondary drives are stimuli (e.g., earning money, winning titles) that acquire the
motivational characteristics of primary drives as a result of conditioning or other forms of
learning. Applied to sport, drive theory postulates a positive and linear relationship
between arousal level and performance. In other words, the more aroused an athlete is,
the better his or her performance should be. Initially, support for this theory was claimed
by researchers like Oxendine (1984) who argued that in power and/or speed sports such
as weightlifting or sprinting, a high level of arousal tends to enhance athletic
performance. Although superficially plausible, this theory does not stand up to scientific
scrutiny. For example, consider the problem of false starts in sprinting. Here, an athlete
may become so aroused physiologically that s/he anticipates wrongly and ends up
“jumping the gun”. Indeed, this very problem occurred in the 1996 Olympic Games when
the British sprinter Linford Christie made two false starts in the 100 m race and was
subsequently disqualified. In an effort to counteract this problem of over-anticipation,
official starters in sprint competitions tend to use variable foreperiods before firing their
pistols. Similar problems stemming from over-arousal can occur in weightlifting when
athletes fail to “chalk up” before lifting the barbell. In team sports, over-arousal may be
prompted by rousing “pep talks” delivered by a coach to his or her players before a game.
On the one hand, such talks may capture the attention of the players, especially if they

Sport and exercise psychology: A critical introduction 80