Arousal theories Flashcards
Drive theory
Greater the arousal the more likely we are to use our dominant response. (A well learned behaviour/habbit)
Relationship between arousal and performance is linear- as arousal increases so does performance. However, this is only true if the task is simple or our dominant response is correct
Positive effect on simple gross motor skills. E.g. lifting weights, running
If the dominant response is not correct, arousal is more likely to cause a decrease in performance. Increased arousal can be worse for beginners
Performance = Arousal x Skill
Drive theory criticism
Simplistic
Even top performers with correct dominant responses experience a reduction in performance in high arousal settings
Inverted U Theory
Performance increases with an increase in arousal up to a point (optimal arousal or ideal performance state IPS). Arousal past this point will gradually decrease performance (tension, reduced concentration, inability to take in the correct information)
The optimal arousal which will differ from sport to sport and athlete to athlete
The relationship between arousal and performance is curvilinear. Performance levels will be at their highest at the optimal point of arousal. If arousal is too low or too high, performance will be lower
At the IPS you are in flow state. Everything seems easy and you perform without any fatigue
Inverted U Theory criticism
When arousal are too high decreases performance are not always gradual but can be a sharp drop
More widely accepted than drive theory because it suggests even the elite can have a dip in performance
Catastrophe theory
The curve is not regular in shape
Performance may have a sudden drop in performance when arousal is past the optimal point. This is in contrast to the steady fall of the inverted U theory
The point where performance level drops is described as the point of catastrophe
This theory helps to explain choking. This is where an athlete suddenly starts to make large errors and can not control their performance. The athlete suddenly starts to make large errors and can not control their performance. The athlete usually has too much muscle tension, reduced coordination and a narrow attentional focus
The main advantage of this theory over the inverted U theory is that the catastrophe theory recognises that psychological and cognitive elements affect performers differently
This theory states the drop may be caused by high levels of worry. In high cognitive situations (negative thoughts, worrying and apprehension), as the psychological arousal increases just past the optimal, the performance drops suddenly called the catastrophe
Key points of drive theory of arousal
Greater the arousal the more likely we are to use our dominant response (A well learned behaviour/habit)
Relationship between arousal and performance is linear - as arousal increases so does performance. However, this is only true if the task is simple or our dominant response is correct.
Positive effect on simple gross motor skills. E.g lifting weights, running.
If the dominant response is not correct, arousal is more likely to cause a decrease in performance. Increased arousal can be worse for beginners. (McMorris 2004)
The drive theory is often summarised by the equation performance = arousal x Skill
Criticism of catastrophe theory
More complex than inverted U as explains how sharp drop in performance can occur. Explains how recovery can take place. Accounts more individual differences than inverted U
Individual zones of optimal functioning IZOF
Hanin developed IZOF
Athletes have a zone of state anxiety that is comfortable for them and where their best performance happen
Once above or below this zone there is a detrimental effect on performance
This theory is an alternative to the inverted U hypothesis as Hanin states that optimal performance does not always happen at the midpoint of the curve for all athletes but it varies from athlete to athlete
Optimal arousal will differ individuals and many variables that need to be taken into consideration. The main 3 are: personality, task, stage learning
Unlike the inverted U hypothesis IZOF states that individuals perform optimally at different arousal levels depending upon the above factors, therefore not all athletes optimal performance is at the top of the inverted U
