The Psychology of Performance [1 ed.] 1138219193, 9781138219199

Citation preview

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PERFORMANCE

Why is performing under pressure often so difficult? What strategies can help us deliver our best performance? How can we boost our self-confidence? The Psychology of Performance explores the key psychological factors that affect our ability to cope under pressure, whether it’s competing in a sport, appearing in front of an audience, or meeting a tight deadline. It looks at how we develop skills through learning and practice, and how self-confidence and decision-making can be sharpened to boost our expertise. The book explains how to develop the best mindset for performance, and shows how factors such as sleep, nutrition, and rest and recovery can influence our moods and how we function. When we need to perform a task with little room for error, The Psychology of Performance helps us to understand how to do this to the best of our ability. Stewart T. Cotterill is a Consultant Sport and Performance Psychologist, and a leadership and performance researcher at the AECC University College, UK.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF EVERYTHING The Psychology of Everything is a series of books which debunk the myths and pseudo-science surrounding some of life’s biggest questions. The series explores the hidden psychological factors that drive us, from our sub-conscious desires and aversions, to the innate social instincts handed to us across the generations. Accessible, informative, and always intriguing, each book is written by an expert in the field, examining how research-based knowledge compares with popular wisdom, and illustrating the potential of psychology to enrich our understanding of humanity and modern life. Applying a psychological lens to an array of topics and contemporary concerns – from sex to addiction to conspiracy theories – The Psychology of Everything will make you look at everything in a new way. Titles in the series: The Psychology of Grief Richard Gross The Psychology of  Sex Meg-John Barker

The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories Jan-Willem van Prooijen

The Psychology of  Dieting Jane Ogden

The Psychology of Addiction Jenny Svanberg

The Psychology of  Performance Stewart T. Cotterill

The Psychology of Fashion Carolyn Mair

The Psychology of  Trust Ken J. Rotenberg

The Psychology of Gardening by Harriet Gross

The Psychology of W   orking Life Toon Taris

The Psychology of Gender by Gary W.Wood

For further information about this series please visit www.thepsychologyofeverything.co.uk

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PERFORMANCE STEWART T. COTTERILL

First published 2018 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2018 Stewart T. Cotterill The right of Stewart T. Cotterill to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-21919-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-21920-5 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-43601-2 (ebk) Typeset in Joanna MT by Apex CoVantage, LLC

CONTENTS

Prefacevii About the author ix Acknowledgementsxi 1 Introduction

1

2 Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

9

3 The impact of confidence on performance

27

4 Making the right decision when it counts

45

5 Factors determining psychological performance

65

6 Practicing for performance

87

Further reading 105 References109

PREFACE

The ability to perform when it matters is a key characteristic of many performance domains within human existence. Individuals and groups who have competed in sport, appeared in front of an audience, performed on a stage, had a tight deadline to meet, or performed a task with little room for error will appreciate the impact that pressure can have on the ability to perform. Those individuals who are successful, and successful on a regular basis, have developed strategies to cope with and excel under pressure, and achieve high levels of performance. Instead of existing in isolation the psychological approaches to preparation and performance adopted across these different domains are very similar. The main reason for this is that the underpinning structures and processes are the same for this ‘performance psychology’ regardless of the performance settings. Building upon this crucial point, The Psychology of Performance seeks to provide an overview of key psychological factors that both influence and determine performance across a diverse range of settings, providing the reader with a solid foundation from which to better understand these psychological factors and their underpinning mechanisms. The book will also consider some practical strategies that can be applied to enhance the likelihood of achieving positive outcomes in performance domains. In terms of the structure of the book, The

viii  Preface

Psychology of Performance first considers how the development of expertise takes place, and how key motor (movement) skills are developed and enhanced. Building upon this core aspect of performance, The Psychology of Performance considers the impact of decision-making on performance, and how to ensure individuals make the right decisions when it counts. The book progresses to consider key factors that both influence and determine psychological performance under pressure before focusing on how best to practice and prepare for a range of real performance environments. For anyone interested in developing a strong appreciation of the key factors determining performance under pressure, The Psychology of Performance is the book for you. This book is aimed at a global audience who are looking to better understand factors influencing performance, and more specifically the key psychological factors both influencing and determining performance. The Psychology of Performance serves as a great introduction to undergraduate students across a diverse range of performance and learning-focused disciplines. The book will further appeal to coaches, educators, and teachers involved in developing individuals who thrive under pressure. Finally, the book is written to be accessible to nonacademic groups and anyone with an interest in performance under pressure. Each chapter in The Psychology of Performance contains a brief discussion of the main psychological topics relevant to that specific section. Each chapter then considers a range of approaches that can be adopted to further enhance performance. Finally, The Psychology of Performance provides expert advice on key psychological issues and mental skills pertinent to successful performance when it counts. In achieving these aims, the book offers a great introduction to the field of performance psychology. The Psychology of Performance is a great introductory text to this growing area of interest within the field of psychology, and provides a strong foundation upon which to build further knowledge, expertise, or performance.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Stewart T. Cotterill, PhD, is Head of School for Health, Wellbeing, and Performance, and sport and performance psychology consultant at AECC University College. He is a British Psychological Society (BPS) Chartered Psychologist and a Registered Practitioner Psychologist with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). Stewart has extensive applied experience across multiple performance domains ranging from sport to medicine. His current research interests include the psychology of performance, leadership in sport, and factors determining team performance under pressure. He is also author of several other books including: Performance Psychology, Team Psychology in Sports, and Sport and Exercise Psychology: Practitioner Case Studies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank everyone at Routledge Books for their support in undertaking this project. In particular, thank you to Russell George who has been very supportive on this and other book projects. I would also like to thank all of the performers across different performance domains that I have met along the way; and in particular thank them for developing my understanding of what they do and what is required for success.

1 INTRODUCTION

As a branch of psychology, the psychology of performance is pretty much what the title suggests: a domain within psychology that focuses on the way the mind works (or needs to work) to be able to perform at a high level when it counts time after time. The ability to perform when it matters is a key characteristic of many performance environments within human existence including: sport, business, surgery, the emergency services, the military, and aviation.Those performers who are successful, and successful on a regular basis, across these domains have developed specific strategies to cope with and excel under the pressure that is associated with performance at the highest level. The psychological strategies utilized to perform when it counts are similar across many performance-focused domains. While the context is different each performance environment is ‘pressured’ and the key psychological skills and abilities that separate the successful from the unsuccessful are similar across the board.This chapter will seek to introduce this domain by clarifying what performance and performance psychology are, and by outlining key psychological factors that underpin successful performance.

WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGY? In order to understand what the psychology of performance is, it is important to first re-clarify what we understand by psychology, and

2  Introduction

how the psychology of performance or ‘performance psychology’ exists as a subcomponent of the broader field of psychology. At a very simplistic level psychology is a science of the mind and human behaviour, though it does not occupy a completely distinct position as a field of study as there are ‘crossovers’ around the periphery of the field with other disciplines, including biology, medicine, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, and artificial intelligence. The field of psychology is multifaceted and includes many subdisciplines including cognitive, developmental, clinical, evolutionary, forensic, health, occupational, social, biological, and sport and exercise psychology. Of fundamental importance to the field of psychology is developing an understanding of the individual’s thoughts and behaviours: how these thoughts and behaviours are developed, and how they change; and by understanding the influence of a broad range of personal, interpersonal, and environmental factors on how individuals and groups think and behave.

WHAT IS PERFORMANCE? Successful performance across a range of performance domains is not just about having good technical movement skills; good decisionmaking is crucial as well (knowing when and how to execute these skills). So good performance is not simply about executing your skills, it is also about executing the right skills at the right time. Indeed, in seeking to further conceptualize performance, sport psychology researchers Jerry Thomas, Karen French and Charlotte Humphries (1986) developed a specific definition that suggests performance is “a complex product of cognitive knowledge about the current situation and past events, combined with a player’s ability to produce the sport skill(s) required” (p. 259). This definition emphasizes the same two important components of performance: mental (knowledge and decision-making) and motor (executing the required skills). A second fundamental aspect of performance relates to the ability to ‘perform’ under pressure. It is one thing to be able to execute your skills and make the right decisions in practice/training but can

Introduction 

3

this be achieved under pressure? As a result, the performance of the relevant skills and undertaking the required decision-making processes in themselves are not always enough (although it is a good start). Being able to perform under pressure is crucial in ultimately determining how you will perform in real performance settings (the real world). Understanding what performance is and the factors that determine its outcomes are important because these factors should determine what practice for performance looks like and what factors are included in practice design.

PERFORMANCE PSYCHOLOGY The field of performance psychology is concerned with understanding the psychological factors that both influence and determine performance. There has been an increasing interest in the psychological factors influencing performance across a diverse range of performance domains in the last 10–15 years, which in turn has seen the development of this hybrid field within psychology. Specifically, performance psychology has been defined as “the mental components of superior performance, in situations and performance domains where excellence is a central element” (Hays, 2012, p. 25). The ability to flawlessly execute complex skills under pressure when the stakes are high is a crucial characteristic of a number of performance environments of human endeavour. It is also true that many of the underpinning psychological factors that determine the degree of success achieved are also similar across these performance domains. The psychological demands are similar because broadly speaking the key characteristics of a range of different performance environments are similar. Specifically: • Limited time (time pressures) • Uncertain outcome(s) • Successful performance dependent on high skill level and near flawless execution • A desired outcome • The existence of perceived pressure

4  Introduction

Due to the similarities in the constraints of these environments there are also similarities in the techniques and approaches adopted by performers across these environments to ensure they are able to perform effectively when needed. Another important aspect of performance, and performance psychology, is the preparation that is required to underpin performance. Preparation that focuses solely on technical motor skills is not enough for individuals to consistently perform to a high level. There also needs to be practice of the psychological skills required, and practice for the performance environment. The closer the practice environment replicates the performance environment the more likely it is that successful outcomes will be achieved on a regular basis. Key factors to consider when developing expert performers who deliver under pressure include: understanding how expertise is acquired (how you move from a novice to an expert); appreciating the impact of confidence on performance; understanding the process underpinning decision-making; and understanding key psychological skills that enhance performance.

KEY CONCEPTS WITHIN PERFORMANCE PSYCHOLOGY As an emerging field, authors to date have explored performance psychology from a range of different perspectives. One of the earliest books that explicitly focused on performance was Human Performance: Cognition, Stress, and Individual Differences written by Gerald Matthews, Roy Davies, Stephen Westerman, and Rob Stammers in 2000. In this book the authors considered a broad range of psychological factors linked to human performance, including the underpinning cognitive architecture and key subsystems (including memory and attention). The book also considered a range of relevant related factors including: skilled performance, human error, stress and arousal, fatigue, individual differences, and ageing. More recently in Performance Psychology: A Practitioner’s Guide, edited by Dave Collins, Angela Button, and Hugh Richards (2011), four specific aspects of performance were considered: preparation, provision (of support), practice, and performance. Across these four broad sections the book considers the following: the

Introduction 

5

development of expertise; the identification and development of talent; the development and organization of the environment in which performance is expected to develop; skill acquisition; and mental practice and d ­ ecision-making. The book then considers key performance ‘skills’ including coping, emotional control, attention, and dealing with pressure. Markus Raab, Babett Lobinger, Sven Hoffmann, Alexandra Pizzera, and Sylvain Laborde, in their 2016 book titled Performance Psychology: Perception, Action, Cognition, and Emotion, adopted a slightly different approach to understanding performance. Raab and colleagues adopted a very ‘cognitive’ perspective on performance, exploring factors such as action-cognition coupling, expectations and performance failure, motor imagery and performance, perception, attention and errors, and emotion and performance. The authors also sought to consider these cognitive-perceptual factors in different performance domains. Finally, Stewart Cotterill (2017), in his book titled Performance Psychology: Theory and Practice, offered a more applied conceptualization of performance psychology, considering the factors that both influence and determine performance under pressure. Cotterill’s book starts by providing an overview of factors limiting human psychological performance (such as the nervous system, diet, and rest and recovery). The book then explores key factors that influence performance including cognition, perception, and action; pressure; the decision-making process; the role of emotion in performance; resilience; ageing and experience; and confidence, as well as considering how motor skills are developed; how expertise is achieved; psychological strategies to enhance performance under pressure; and how to practice for performance. The book is organized based on a model of performance psychology the author presents at the start of the text. This model is split into four sections. The first highlights individual characteristics that influence the individual performer’s ability to perform, including age and experience, resilience, skill level, strengths, predispositions, and personality. The second section of the model highlights a number of factors determining performance including the quality of performance preparation, environmental factors, state factors (such as sleep and nutrition), personalized performance strategies, and

6  Introduction

cognition (including decision-making, motivation, problem-solving ability). The third part of the model highlights the impact confidence and coping strategies have on performance, with the final section of the model stating that perceptions of preparedness ultimately determine the degree to which there are positive or negative performance outcomes. These different texts outline a broad range of topics under the umbrella term of performance psychology. However, while this is the case there are some relatively consistent factors that emerge from various sources, which will form the main focus for the current book.

OVERVIEW OF THE BOOK The remaining chapters of this book seek to provide an introduction and overview of key concepts that form the bedrock of the psychology of performance domain. Chapter 2 focuses on how individuals learn to perform and achieve high levels of both performance and consistency. In particular, the chapter introduces the concept of learning, outlining both traditional (cognitive) and ecological dynamics approaches to understanding the learning process. The chapter also considers the role of deliberate practice in the development of expertise, and considers the psychological differences between novice and expert performers. The third chapter focuses on the importance of confidence for successful performance in both individual and team contexts. Central to this area of understanding are the related concepts of self-efficacy and collective efficacy. Building upon this knowledge base the chapter also considers how to both develop and enhance efficacy beliefs as well as explores the emerging concept of resilient confidence. Chapter 4 explores the process of decision-making and how the choices individuals and teams make impact upon performance. The chapter considers classical, naturalistic, and ecological approaches to conceptualizing the decision-making process. The chapter also explores factors that influence the decision-making process including the influence of emotions and risk-taking. The chapter also explores

Introduction 

7

how teams develop a ‘shared’ approach to decision-making in the formation of shared mental models. The fifth chapter considers a range of factors that both influence and determine psychological performance. Of primary importance in this chapter is the mindset adopted, and understanding how to develop an optimal mindset for performance. The chapter also considers a range of factors that can limit performance, including sleep, rest, and recovery; nutrition and hydration; and the experience of pressure. Linked to the concept of pressure is the ability to cope, and understanding the coping strategies and techniques that can be applied. The chapter finishes by considering a range of ‘psychological skills’ that can be developed and applied including goal-setting, relaxation techniques, imagery, self-talk, and the development of pre-­ performance routines. Finally, the chapter also considers team-related factors including role clarity, leadership, cohesion, and team emotion. The final chapter focuses on how best to prepare for the performance environment. In order to do this the chapter considers what preparation is, and how effective performance habits can be developed. The chapter also considers how the way that you prepare impacts your performance, and strategies that can be adopted to better prepare for successful performance. The chapter also considers how to enhance team performance through focusing on the development of a supportive team performance environment. At the end of the book there are also recommendations for further reading. This section considers books that either offer the next step in terms of understanding, or provide greater clarity regarding some specific concepts.

SUMMARY The mind and psychological performance can have a significant impact upon overall performance outcomes and the likelihood of a successful performance outcome. Understanding the factors that both influence and determine this psychological performance are important if you want to maximize the potential for performance

8  Introduction

success. Historically this understanding has been limited to some specific fields of expertise. However, the recent development of the field of performance psychology offers the potential for individuals and teams across different performance domains to better and more broadly understand the nature of performance rather than simply limited to their specific performance domain. This development in turn opens the door to future elevation in performance levels through the sharing of best practice and understanding.

2 LEARNING THE ROPES Becoming an expert The first aspect of any performance that needs to be mastered is the development of the relevant skill set to perform the required movements and actions. Understanding the process through which learning and development takes place is important to first develop, then to maximize skill execution for performance. It is important for performers to develop consistent skills that can elicit consistent levels of performance. Without consistent expertise in this area performance is ultimately doomed to failure. This chapter explores the process of learning and the development of expertise and expert performance. The chapter will also consider the role and effect of deliberate practice on expertise development, and crucially explore the differences that exist between expert and novice performers, and how this information can be used to facilitate the development of expert performers.

WHAT IS LEARNING? Learning can be broadly conceptualized as a change in behaviour, knowledge, or cognition. As a result, the outcomes of learning are often communicated in some sort of measurable index of behaviour change, changes in reportable knowledge, or changes in cognition. This conceptualization suggests that a learner (after learning) can

10   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

do something, knows something, or thinks something that they did not before. This psychological change is described as being ‘relatively permanent’, suggesting that it is neither transitory (will disappear quite quickly) or fixed (will always be there). Also, it is important to recognize that these changes might not take place immediately after the learning experience. The changes that take place are a result of experience and/or practice; these experiences must be continually reinforced for learning to take place. As such, experiencing something once does not count as learning. Recent advances in the understanding of learning, or at least its conceptualization, have been offered from the field of neuroscience. This field has helped to establish a fundamental concept, that learning equals a change in the organization of the brain. This statement is literally true, with learning resulting in changes in brain microstructure and function. To be more technical these changes are usually observed in the organization, complexity, and robustness of neural networks. When the brain learns something new it establishes new connections among neurons to represent what it has learnt. It is also important to acknowledge that this learning does not necessarily take place at pre-designated times for learning (e.g., a training session or class). Learning is predominantly a function of repetition and reinforcement. Whenever this repetition takes place, the brain is learning. As a result, adopting a broader perspective on what an individual is learning is important if you are going to understand (and as a result try to mould) human behaviour. An important related concept of particular importance to performance and performers is the notion of learning from failure. Theories about failure suggest that the core of learning in this context is to understand why the gap between performance and preceding expectations has occurred. Through reasoning as well as trial and error, new insights into potential solutions can be created. Cognitive psychologists Alexander Wilhelmsson, Sidney Dekker, and Daniel Hummerdal (2013) specifically described learning from failure as “the act of creating a difference between what was known before and after failure. These differences are often formalized in abstract knowledge and made available for future remembrance” (p. 1). This learning

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

11

from failure enables the individual to identify faulty parts of the performance process, and then redesign or modify their performance in an attempt to maximize the possibility of successful performance outcomes.

MOTOR SKILL ACQUISITION Linked to the broad concept of learning is the notion of the ‘acquisition of skill’ which is of particular importance when considering performance across domains ranging from sport to surgery. This process of acquiring skill has broadly been described as a relatively permanent change in performance resulting from practice or past experience (Kerr, 1982). While this process might appear straightforward, the way we acquire skills and then perform these skills under pressure has produced very different theoretical explanations. Broadly speaking these ‘theoretical’ explanations can be categorized as being either ‘traditional’ (information processing) or ‘ecological dynamics’ approaches. Traditional approaches

These approaches have predominantly focused on a ‘top-down’ approach where the individual needs to develop a model of performance that can only be acquired through repetition. The best known of these models is Paul Fitts and Michael Posner’s (1967) stages of learning model. Fitts and Posner, both eminent psychologists, suggested that the learning of a movement progresses through three sequential and interrelated phases: the cognitive phase, the associative phase, and the autonomous phase. The cognitive phase involves the performer identifying and developing the specific components of a skill. The associative phase involves the linking of these component parts into a smooth action, in a process involving deliberate practice. The autonomous phase involves continued rehearsal of the skill so it becomes automatic. While this is probably the best-known model there are others. For example, Antoinette Gentile (1972), a professor

12   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

of psychology and physical education, proposed a two-stage model. In the first stage the individual works to develop a movement coordination pattern to learn to differentiate between regular and irregular conditions. In the second stage individuals adapt their movement patterns, increase the consistency of goal achievement, and ultimately perform with an economy of effort. Extending this line of thought, Brothers Stuart and Hubert Dreyfus (1986) suggested a five-stage model of skill acquisition in adults including: novice, advanced beginner, competence, proficiency, and expertise. Novices seek to decompose the task environment into context-free features. The novice then develops rules for determining action based on these features. Advanced beginners utilize monitoring to ensure behaviours increasingly conform to the established rules. Competence relates to the individual understanding the environment (which is no longer context-free) by developing ‘aspects’ which are then associated with specific actions. Proficiency involves exposing the learner to a wide variety of ‘whole’ situations. Each whole situation is linked to a long-term goal. Expertise sees a significant improvement of mental processing. The learner develops an analytical principle (rule) to connect understanding of the situation to a specific action. In recent years the simplicity of these traditional views has been questioned. In particular the proposed shift from cognitive control to automatic processing, and the view that the two states are mutually exclusive. In response to this criticism Wayne Christensen, John Sutton, and Doris Mcilwain (2016) suggested a hybrid model that they called ‘Mesh’, where cognitive control is used to focus on strategic aspects of performance with automatic processes more concerned with the implementation of movement and performance. The Mesh approach suggests that ‘Mesh’ cognitive control contributes directly to skill execution by way of the influence of situation awareness on action. The influence of cognitive control on skill execution is not through the ‘step-by-step’ control of the movement but through the selection of the type of action required, linking the right movements with the relevant perceptual skills, and through determining what the rules are governing the execution of the movement. Christensen and

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

13

colleagues cited the presence of action slips (unintended behaviours that result from a lack of attentional focus) an increased attentional focus, and an increase in cognitive effort as indicators of cognitive (rather than automatic) control. Ecological dynamics approach

The ecological dynamics approach is broadly contradictory to the traditional view of skill acquisition in that it suggests that information about what to do and how to do it emerges from the environment rather than being determined by higher order cognitive processes (thinking and repetitive learning). The information required to drive movement emerges from the interaction between the individual, the task, and the environment rather than a top-down, rules-based system. Ecological dynamics is a theoretical perspective that seeks to understand the complexity of the interactions that take place between the individual performer, the environment they are performing in, and the task(s) they are required to perform. According to Nikolai Bernstein (1967), a Russian neurophysiologist, the acquisition of movement coordination is “the process of mastering redundant degrees of freedom of the body, and transforming them into a controllable system” (p. 127). Degrees of freedom in this context refers to the fact there are multiple ways to perform a movement to achieve the same outcome goal. As such there is no one movement solution to a particular problem. In this case the process of learning is about continued exposure to environmental cues so the individual can begin to formulate preferred responses. Also, early on in this process the learner ‘freezes’ degrees of freedom to reduce the complexity of the movement and as a result enhance movement control. While this approach can be effective it also makes movement rigid and jerky. As such, the theory of ecological dynamics suggests that the relevant scale of analysis for understanding performance behaviour is the performer-environment relationship, and not the description of the environment or the activities of the learner,

14   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

separately. The practical implication of this perspective is that in order to enhance performance the individual needs continuous interaction with the performance environment, rather than focusing on separate skill development. James Gibson (1986), an American psychologist specializing in visual perception, suggested that individuals are surrounded by ‘banks’ of energy flows (information) that act to provide the context and guidance for the coordination of movement in performance environments. He suggested that this critical information that is inherent in the environment around us serves to continuously shape decision-making, planning and organization, and goal-directed (performance-focused) behaviour. This approach suggests that skill acquisition programmes across performance domains should aim to develop an enhanced ‘coupling’ of an individual’s perception and the execution of required motor skills. One of the ways in which this can be achieved is to help the individual to understand the information sources available to them and how to harness these sources for action. From the ecological dynamics perspective, the development of expertise requires the individual to learn how to identify and use the opportunities for action that the environment presents them with to then achieve their performance goals. Crucial in the designing of practice from this perspective is how ‘representative’ the design of the learning environment is. Higher levels of representation equate to the practice environment being more closely aligned to that experienced where real performance is required.

COGNITIVE SKILL ACQUISITION The development of cognitive skills has at least in part been linked to some of the theoretical grounding advocated for motor skill acquisition. When individuals practice cognitive skills the process usually requires the use of a prescribed set of mental operations to obtain solutions and performance improvements. Like motor skill acquisition the learning process takes repetition and practice. In this context though the focus is on practicing cognitive rather than motor

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

15

challenges. This practice can involve continued exposure to a particular problem to facilitate development of more effective solutions. One explanation for this process was offered by psychology professor Gordon Logan (1988) in his instance theory. In this theory Logan suggested that there is a shift in how problems are solved as a function of repetitions of problem instances. For many cognitive tasks initial performance is poor because of the reliance on an execution algorithm. As the number of repetitions of the problem increase, though, instance theory suggests that there will be an increase in the probability that solutions will be retrieved from memory rather than deliberated. There is also a long-standing view within the broader psychology literature that cognitive ability is a key determinant of performance. Indeed, over 100 years of research has supported cognitive ability as a key determinant of skilled performance across a broad range of environments, including work performance, career achievements, and academic performance. However, while this is true there is also a more recent view that under some conditions higher levels of cognitive ability can actually be detrimental to performance. In particular it has been suggested that higher ability performers are less adaptable than lower cognitive ability individuals in dynamic performance environments.

THE ROLE OF DELIBERATE PRACTICE Anders Ericsson, a Swedish psychologist, and colleagues introduced the psychological concept of deliberate practice (1993), suggesting that it was not simply practicing that leads to performance improvements but engagement in a ‘deliberate’ practice designed to achieve specific outcomes. Ericsson suggested that it was this deliberate practice that allows individuals to attain expertise and ultimately achieve higher levels of performance. Deliberate practice in this context refers to activities that require cognitive or physical effort, that do not lead to immediate personal, social, or financial rewards, and are undertaken with the purpose of improving performance. Although the concept

16   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

of deliberate practice was originally suggested using data from musicians, Ericsson and his colleagues have indicated that using practice in this way applies to the acquisition of expertise in all areas of human endeavour, with the domain of sport often used as an example of the relationship between types of practice and attainment. In particular, this group of psychologists suggested that between-group differences in skilled performance (e.g., expert compared to less-expert groups) are predominantly related to differences in the amount of deliberate practice accumulated over long periods of time. In order to provide support for this perspective, Ericsson and colleagues (1993) recruited musicians with different levels of accomplishment and asked them to estimate the amount of deliberate practice they had engaged in per week for each year of their musical careers. On average, the total amount of practice was much higher for the most-accomplished groups of musicians when compared to the data from less-accomplished groups. One example of this finding was the violinists that Ericsson and colleagues collected data from. The better violinists in the study reported over 10,000 hours of deliberate practice compared to the 7,800 hours reported by the violinists described as being ‘good’, and 4,600 for the ‘less accomplished’ violinists. Ericsson felt that the findings were so conclusive that he suggested that the individual differences in ultimate performance can largely be accounted for by the level of time spent engaging in deliberate practice. This perspective suggested that the differences between expert performers and normal adults reflects a life-long period of deliberate effort to improve performance in the specific domain of performance. While the volume of deliberate practice was cited as crucial by Ericsson and colleagues they did also acknowledge the importance of specific influencing factors that they broadly grouped into three categories: resources, effort, and motivation. Specific resources highlighted include significant others (e.g., coaches and parents), the developmental context (e.g., culture, size of birthplace, and relative age), commitment, and enjoyment. Effort relates to how much energy is invested, and, crucially, where that effort is invested. It has been suggested that the most effective performers maximize their practice

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

17

time by engaging in the most important practice activities, and taking less time for breaks and to rest. Although this perspective gained a lot of traction in the late 1990s and early 2000s, more contemporary thinking has suggested that while the volume of deliberate practice is important it is not as fundamental as first thought. Indeed, there is increasing research evidence to support this contemporary view. For example, Fernand Gobet and Guillermo Campitelli (2007) from their study of Argentinian chess players reported a high degree of variability in the total amount of deliberate practice among master-level chess players. Gobet and Campitelli reported that volume of deliberate practice ranged from slightly more than 3,000 hours to more than 23,000 hours. Criticisms of the deliberate practice approach have also been made in popular publishing literature. For example, Malcolm Gladwell (2008) in his book Outliers:The story of success criticized the perspective adopted by Ericsson and colleagues. Indeed, Gladwell suggested that “the conclusion that the main factor distinguishing one musician from another, and their ultimate achievements, is how hard he or she works” (p. 40) was overly simplistic. A similar criticism was offered by Matthew Syed (2010), journalist and ex-British table tennis number one, in his book Bounce: The myth of talent and the power of practice. He reflected that while top performers had devoted thousands of hours to practice, that was not all they had done nor was it the only discriminating factor. Part of this criticism of the deliberate practice approach is based on Ericsson’s view that there were no exceptions to this pattern: nobody had reached the elite group without sufficient levels of deliberate practice, and nobody who had invested the time had failed to excel. Contemporary evidence has shown that this is not the case. Evidence suggests that some individuals reach an elite/expert level of performance without large volumes of practice, while other individuals fail to reach elite/expert levels despite investing significant time in deliberate practice. The second enduring message from Ericsson’s work has been the notional importance of the 10,000 hours threshold. Through the late

18   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

1990s and early 2000s, 10,000 hours (or roughly 10 years) was seen as the required threshold level to reach elite/expert levels of performance. However, the study conducted by Gobet and Campitelli (2007) suggests that there is potentially an enormous amount of variability in the required volumes of deliberate practice, even in elite performers. One player in Gobet and Campitelli’s chess study took 26 years of serious involvement in chess to reach a master level, while another player in the study took less than 2 years to reach this level. These results suggest that while deliberate practice is important, it does not appear to be the defining factor it has been suggested to be.

EXPERTISE An important starting point in seeking to understand expertise is to clarify the differences between an ‘expert’ and ‘expertise’. An expert is someone who is very skilful and well-informed within a particular domain of operation. In contrast, expertise refers to the characteristics, skills, and knowledge that distinguish experts from novices and nonexperts. Within the domain of expertise there is a long-standing debate regarding the degree to which performance is underpinned by innate talent (what you are born with) and experience (what you learn). While there is debate about the volume of deliberate practice that is required to reach elite/expert levels, what is agreed is the importance of the individual’s motivation in the process. Such mastery in performance settings requires significant investment of time and effort. Without an appropriate ‘inner drive’ to succeed even the most naturally talented individuals will fail to make it to the top. In particular, intrinsic motivation has been highlighted to be particularly important. Intrinsic motivation is driven by an inherent interest, satisfaction, or enjoyment of the task being performed and is demonstrated by performers who focus on the mastery of the task, feel a high degree of autonomy and self-determination, and are not predominantly motivated by external factors (e.g., rewards or reputation). While there is a heavy focus on speed and the reduction of error in literature relating to expertise, that is not the whole story. Flexibility

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

19

and robustness are also key indicators of the development of expertise. In this context flexibility refers to the ability to apply a skill to new problems that are different to the problems that formed the basis of training and practice. Robustness is associated with the individual’s ability to protect skilled performance from various ‘disturbances’ including unexpected events or changing situational demands.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPERTS AND NOVICES In a number of performance domains experts have been suggested to have better perceptual skills, especially in terms of pattern recognition and anticipation, superior decision-making skills, better meta-­ cognitive skills and abilities, especially in terms of knowledge of appropriate tactics and procedures, and superior movement execution skills, especially in terms of movement adaptability and automaticity. Unconscious control

The process of learning broadly highlights a shift from conscious awareness in learning to unconscious control for performance execution. This shift is highlighted as one of the key differences between experts and non-experts. Indeed, psychology researchers Lyn Hasher and Rose Zacks (1979) suggested that the processing of information becomes less effortful and demands fewer attentional resources as a consequence of learning, eventually reaching a stage of control that can occur automatically with little conscious effort and few demands for attention. Visual attention and visual search strategies

There has been much research over the past 25 years that has explored potential differences between experts and novices. While there are always individual exceptions, the conclusion has been that structurally experts are the same as novices. Outside of the specific performance domain, groups of ‘experts’ perform the same as groups of

20   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

‘novices’ in terms of visual perception and visual processing. However, while this is the case within the domain of expertise, contemporary research suggests that there are significant differences in the scanning behaviour of the two groups. Scanning behaviour refers to how the eyes receive visual information from the ‘scene’ they are viewing. Research that focuses on ‘eye tracking’ is broadly interested in three specific actions associated with the eyes: fixations, saccades, and smooth pursuits. Fixations are technically not a movement at all but when the gaze is ‘fixed’ on a specific spot (so the eyes are not moving). The eye stays relatively still so visual perception can take place. These fixations are quick, usually lasting for 0.2–0.3 seconds in duration. In between these fixations are saccades. Saccades are rapid shifts of the line of sight from one location/object to another. Saccades are extremely quick movements, often only 0.03–0.08 seconds in duration. The final action is the smooth pursuit. This occurs when the eyes are tracking an object that is moving through the visual environment (e.g., an aeroplane). A broad range of research studies have highlighted differences between experts and novices in terms of their visual search behaviour, with experts focusing more than novices on information-rich areas of the visual display. In sports, elite performers have been found to direct their gaze in an appropriate manner sooner, make more predictive eye movements, and fixate on relevant features (important bits of information) for longer than non-elite performers. One example to illustrate this relates to the sport of cricket. Researchers Michael Land and Peter McLeod from the University of Oxford explored the eye movements of elite (professional) and amateur cricketers in the UK using a head-mounted eye camera. The gaze behaviour of the different groups was found to differ in terms of judging the timing and placement of a ball bowled by a fast bowler. Psychology of music expert Aaron Kozbelt (2001) demonstrated a similar phenomenon in artistic performance. He asked artists and non-artists to complete a set of perceptual tasks that required active visual analysis, some requiring drawing and some not. The artists group out-performed the nonartists on both types of tasks, suggesting the artist group possessed a general visual cognitive advantage.

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

21

Perceptual anticipation

Visual anticipation has been suggested to be a crucial skill for performers in many dynamic performance environments. There is evidence to suggest that perceptual-motor anticipation can be transferred to dissimilar performance domains, but that the transfer of perceptual skills (e.g., anticipation and decision-making) is restricted to similar performance domains. This perspective reinforces the acknowledgment that expert performers have a comparative advantage in their domain of expertise, but that it is domain specific. This outcome has also been reported in the visual arts literature where a comparative advantage for artists over non-artists in an art context was not replicated in a non-art setting (e.g., Anglone, Hass, and Cohen, 2016). Thinking and emotion differences

There is a specific body of research that has sought to understand differences between experts and novices in their thinking, particularly in such fields as clinical reasoning in medicine, chess, and problemsolving. There has been a particular focus in this research on inductive reasoning. There is a suggestion emerging that experts can develop unpredictable and atypical thinking behaviours. The suggestion is that as experts develop they enhance their own ability to detect and use atypical (i.e., non-standard) information. In terms of emotion there is a suggestion that for novices, their mood state has the potential to impact upon performance. Indeed, enhanced emotional control has been reported as a characteristic of expertise. Emotion is seen as being far less impactful for experts, in part because they have developed the ability to control their emotions in their domain of expertise. Decision-making

One of the key ways that experts differ from novices relates to their decision-making behaviour. Experts should have an advantage in decision-­making based on two key factors, knowledge and experience. Through greater exposure to the performance environment, experts

22   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

will have developed more detailed procedural and declarative knowledge (see Chapter 4 for a review). The declarative knowledge base underpins the experts’ understanding of what is required in a specific situation (what the rules are), and the procedural knowledge relates to how to execute the required courses of action (decisions). This means that experts are predisposed to know what to do and how to do it in response to specific situations. Experts will also have a memory advantage, and a greater store of prior examples where they have successfully negotiated similar circumstances, which then informs the selection of the optimal solution to a particular challenge or problem. This, though, can be a double-edged sword. Sometimes experience of failure or stress can influence experts in a way that makes them more risk aware, which might not be the case for novice performers. Meta-cognitive skills

Another way in which experts and novices differ relates to the development and use of meta-cognitive skills. Meta-cognition was described by John Flavell (1979) as an individuals’ insight into and control over their own mental processes, or, higher order cognition about cognition. More recent conceptualizations of meta-cognition have suggested a tripartite model of knowledge, control, and monitoring components. Within the meta-cognition literature there is a distinction drawn between meta-cognitive knowledge and meta-cognitive skills. Metacognitive knowledge refers to a person’s declarative knowledge about the interactions between performer, task, and strategy characteristics. Meta-cognitive skills refer to a performer’s procedural knowledge for regulating their problem-solving and learning activities. It is broadly accepted that experts have developed better cognitive knowledge and more effective meta-cognitive skills. This in turn manifests itself in better control of cognitive processes including planning, monitoring, and evaluating cognitive activity. This in turn enables experts to monitor their own cognitive performance and to make adjustments where required.

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

23

DEVELOPING EXPERT PERFORMERS There has been an increasing focus in recent years on the processes required to facilitate the transition from ‘talented’ to ‘expert’. These models have been particularly explored within a sports expertise context. In their book chapter titled ‘Expertise: the goal of performance development’, researchers Nicola Hodges and Joseph Baker (2011) outlined a four-stage model of development through to athletic expertise. The first stage (early development) is characterized by an initial involvement in sporting activities, with learning occurring at a rapid rate. The focus at this stage is on the acquisition of general fundamental skills. The second stage (intermediate development) follows an increased specialization and investment in training/practice. This stage usually also sees the introduction of highly skilled coaches, and where required the provision of higher quality resources. Stage three (expertise) is characterized by world-class performance, and there is an almost exclusive focus on deliberate practice. At this level enjoyment and social engagement are a secondary focus behind performance improvement. Finally, stage four (masters involvement) sees expert performance maintained in the face of diminishing physical/ physiological resources. This stage is characterized by an increased emphasis on endurance rather than sprint/power (explosive) training, and a reduction in the absolute time spent practicing. Crucial for the long road through to expert performance is a strong foundation that is built upon the mastery of fundamental skills (relating to the specific performance domain) and an intrinsic love for performance in that domain of expertise. The importance of the broader talent development environment has been highlighted and further contextualized in recent years. For example, Carsten Larsen and colleagues from Denmark (2013) explored the characteristics of the environment when seeking to understand successful talent development in soccer. Larsen and colleagues suggested that successful talent development environments shared a number of common features including: training groups with

24   Learning the ropes: becoming an expert

supportive relationships; proximal role models; support of performance goals by the wider environment; support for the development of psychosocial skills; training that allows for diversification; a focus on long-term development; a strong and coherent organizational culture; and integration of effort. The development of expert performers was also the focus of research undertaken by performing arts experts Edson Filho, Patrice Aubertin, and Bernard Petiot (2016) focused on the Cirque du Soleil and the National Circus School. Filho and colleagues outlined some key factors that appeared to both influence and determine the development of expertise. These included contextual adaptation (learning the rules of the domain), skill development (learning to be on stage), coping with general performance pressures, and coping with discipline-specific performance pressures. In terms of contextual adaption, it was interesting that the authors highlighted the importance of developing multi- and cross-cultural sensitivity and overcoming language barriers as key requirements. In terms of skill development, the centrality of the interaction with the audience was highlighted as being crucial for success. This is something experts in this domain do well alongside the development and successful execution of technical and emotional skills. In terms of general performance pressures, the authors outlined the importance over overcoming bio-psycho-social pressures. The main ‘general’ pressure articulated was the presence and expectations of the audience regarding performance. Outside of this

Table 2.1  Key points to remember about learning and expertise 1. Repetition leads to learning. 2. You can learn from failure – as long as you understand what went wrong (so you can fix it next time). 3. Practice makes permanent – not perfect. Be careful what it is that you are practicing. 4. Experts perform better because they know what to look for so can make decisions earlier. 5. Experts only have an advantage in their field of expertise, they are not generally better than non-experts at other tasks.

Learning the ropes: becoming an expert 

25

Table 2.2  Practical strategies to enhance learning for performance   1. Your brain learns what you repeat (practice) – so practice getting things right!   2. The more you practice (repeat) the more likely you are to do the thing that you have practiced.   3. If you get it wrong, make sure you understand why (so you can correct it).   4. It is important to ‘learn’ in a similar environment to performance.   5. Learning and tiredness don’t go together. Learn when you are fresh.   6. Learning is tiring for the brain – so take plenty of breaks!   7. Learning mental skills taking practice (the same as physical skills).   8. It is not always about practicing more, but practicing smarter.   9. A sleep after learning helps the brain to make permanent changes. 10. The context is as important as the skill, so make sure you understand what is required (e.g., active decision-making in team sports) as well as the skills you need to play/perform.

general pressure, the authors reported different specific stressors and pressures depending upon whether the performer was an aerial actor, clown, contortionist, juggler, or a member of a ‘dual-act’. In this context experts had successfully developed strategies to cope with these different types of pressures as well as developing highly consistent movement skills and the ability to build rapport with the audience.

SUMMARY Fundamental to any performance domain is the development of the required behaviours, knowledge, and cognitions to be able to execute consistent successful performance. As a result, understanding the process through which learning takes place is of fundamental importance. Through understanding this process a more structured approach can be adopted to talent development, and converting talent into expertise. In particular the designers of performance environments can use this knowledge to develop and maximize the evolution of individuals through to achieving high levels of expertise. It is also important to note that while deliberate practice is important, it is not necessarily quantity over quality, with the required volume of deliberate practice appearing to be individualized.

3 THE IMPACT OF CONFIDENCE ON PERFORMANCE

Confidence, or at least confidence in the ability to go out and perform, or deliver under pressure when it counts, is crucial to successful performance across many performance domains. To be successful individual performers do not necessarily need to be confident people (a personality trait), but they do need to be confident in their ability to go and execute the required skills at the right time. This fact suggests that it is the domain and context-specific confidence that really counts. To be successful on a regular basis the individual performer, or team, needs to feel that they can execute the required skills effectively in a specific context to ultimately be successful. A related concept that is also important for performance is optimism. Having a generally positive disposition can ensure that the individual performer continues to work hard and to invest significant time and energy even if a successful outcome is looking less likely. This chapter will explore what confidence is, how it affects performance and what can be done to increase levels of self-confidence. The chapter will also explore optimism and pessimism and their associated impact on performance.

28   The impact of confidence on performance

SELF-CONFIDENCE Self-confidence has been operationalized in a range of different ways including perceived competence, self-efficacy, movement confidence, and outcome expectancies. Broadly speaking, self-confidence can be viewed as an individual’s belief that he or she can be successful. Self-confidence is proposed to be context-specific to relevant tasks, and it is suggested that some individuals can display this feature through a wide range of activities. Self-confidence is also similar to a related construct termed ‘­self-efficacy’ introduced in Albert Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. Selfefficacy is simply described to be a self-perceived measure of one’s belief in one’s own abilities that is dependent upon contextual background and setting (Perry, 2011). The biggest difference between self-confidence and self-efficacy is that self-confidence is a general feature of personality; it is not a temporary attitude. Psychologist Deborah Feltz (1988), who further defined self-confidence, mused that “rather than a general feature, it is a belief of a person that they can successfully achieve an activity and individuals’ trust to their own judgment, ability, strength and decisions” (p. 425).

EFFICACY BELIEFS From a psychological perspective, the concept we are really interested in is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is a concept originally developed by American psychologist Albert Bandura (1971) as part of his social learning theory. Social learning theory suggests that learning is a cognitive process that takes place through social interactions, and in particular through observation, imitation, and modelling. Building on this work, Bandura published Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory in 1986, a book that highlighted the central importance of cognitive, vicarious, self-regulatory, and self-reflective processes in human adaptation and learning. In social learning theory individuals are not seen simply as reacting to environmental stimuli, but as proactive agents in control of their motivations, beliefs, actions,

The impact of confidence on performance 

29

and emotions. This theory highlighted the central influencing role of a concept Bandura termed ‘self-efficacy’. Self-efficacy was described by Bandura (1997, p. 3) as “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the course of action required to produce given attainments”. Broadly speaking this belief reflects the confidence the individual has in their ability to perform a specific task. This construct was derived from self-efficacy theory, which proposes that self-efficacy enhances performance through increasing the difficulty of self-set goals, increasing the level of effort that is applied, and strengthening persistence. Since the original proposal was developed, there has been much research exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and performance across many domains of human endeavour. Broadly speaking, much of this research supports the existence of a relationship between self-­efficacy beliefs and performance. In Bandura’s original model, four key antecedents were highlighted as both influencing and determining self-efficacy levels (and by association performance): mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological/affective states. This perspective has recently been revised to outline six specific types of antecedents, or sources of efficacy beliefs: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, physiological states, emotional states, and imaginal experiences. Mastery experiences: Involves gaining confidence from mastery and successful experiences: in essence, experiences of ‘doing’. This source of self-efficacy is often cited as being the most important because it is seen to be the most influential. The generally held view here is that positive experiences have a positive impact upon efficacy beliefs, and negative experiences have a negative impact upon efficacy beliefs. Although this view has been questioned, with the suggestion being that negative past experiences could also have a motivational effect, and as a result could increase efficacy beliefs. Vicarious experiences: Gaining confidence from observing the successful experiences of others, usually where parallels can be

30   The impact of confidence on performance

drawn between the performer and the individual(s) being observed. In particular, confidence is gained from observing or modelling others, either in person or via more indirect methods (e.g., video). There is also a suggestion that the provision of feedback related to these vicarious experiences could be a mediating factor regarding the impact that vicarious experiences can have upon efficacy beliefs. Verbal persuasion: Gaining confidence from the support of significant others (including themselves), such as coaches/ instructors, teammates, and managers. While referred to as ‘verbal’ this includes non-verbal social influences such as body language. As might be expected, positive verbal feedback has a facilitative influence on efficacy-beliefs whereas negative verbal feedback can have a debilitative impact upon efficacy beliefs. Physiological states: Influenced by physiological indicators and how they are interpreted by the individual performer (e.g., pain, fatigue, heart-rate). The interpretation of these physiological states is crucial, as the same physiological responses can be interpreted in a positive or negative way. In some performance domains these physiological responses have been cited as a key factor influencing efficacy beliefs. Emotional states: Gaining confidence from the achievement of the ‘required’ psychological state or mindset prior to performance. There is evidence to suggest that positive emotional states and the experiencing of positive emotions can enhance efficacy beliefs whereas negative emotional states and emotions can reduce self-efficacy beliefs. Imaginal experiences: Refers to the performer gaining belief from imagining themselves, or others, executing their skills successfully and achieving successful performance outcomes. Efficacy beliefs have been suggested to vary between individuals and across time in three specific ways. In their 2009 book chapter

The impact of confidence on performance 

31

reviewing self-efficacy interventions, Sandra Short and Lindsay RossStewart suggested that efficacy beliefs vary in terms of their level, strength, and generality. ‘Level’ refers to the individual’s performance attainment at different levels of difficulty. ‘Strength’ refers to the certainty of the individual’s beliefs that they can achieve at these different levels of performance. ‘Generality’ relates to the number of domains of functioning that performers judge themselves to be efficacious in and the transferability of these efficacy judgements across different tasks of activities.

ENHANCING EFFICACY BELIEFS The most effective approaches to enhancing efficacy beliefs seek to develop confidence by focusing on multiple sources. This approach is designed to develop something termed robust/resilient beliefs. This robust confidence allows the individual performer to remain confident even if some of their sources of efficacy beliefs do not support a confident mindset. So, for example, an individual who is in a poor run of form (with mastery experiences being the single biggest influencer) can still remain confident because their confidence in their ability to perform is supported by verbal persuasion and imaginal experiences and their physiological state. However, for the sake of clarity potential interventions will be presented separately for each source of efficacy beliefs. Mastery experiences

As previously mentioned, mastery experiences are generally viewed to be the biggest influencing factor, and as such interventions that focus in this area have the potential to have a significant impact upon efficacy beliefs. Potential interventions could include getting the individual to practice the required skills (reinforcing that they can execute the skills). This strategy builds upon the view that ‘success builds confidence’. To be effective, though, it is not just about being

32   The impact of confidence on performance

successful. The individual needs to feel that they have been successful and that the success was due to their own efforts. Developmental progressions can be effective in this regard, by gradually increasing skill level by facilitating skill improvement. Simulations of the performance environment can also be created to develop the confidence that the required skills can be executed in the ‘real’ performance environment. One example where this has been used very effectively is in the use of virtual reality to help train surgeons and to develop their ability to execute their skills and to make decisions under pressure. Interestingly, there is a suggestion that self-driven rather than externally driven interventions can be more effective. The same principles can be applied when seeking to develop efficacy beliefs relating to performance. Practice or mock performances can be designed to develop the ability to execute the skills in the required way in the right environment. Linked to this is the use of goal-setting strategies. Goal-setting can be a good way to reinforce the success and signpost the performer to the achievement and related positive experiences (for an overview of goal-setting see Chapter 5). Vicarious experience

This shared experience could be achieved by showing the individual video footage of another successful performer, or watching live models/teams perform. An important consideration though for this source of efficacy beliefs is the selection of the model/performer that is used. The model needs to be of an equal performance standard to achieve the greatest effects. The greater the model-observer similarity the greater the influence on the efficacy beliefs of the observer. The natural extension of this line of thinking is that the similarity is greatest when the observer acts as their own model. This suggests that the use of video might offer a strong vicarious experience as well as acting as a trigger for recalling past experiences (mastery experiences). Research suggests that four conditions are necessary for effective modelling to take place: attention, retention, production, and motivation.

The impact of confidence on performance 

33

Verbal persuasion

While not considered as impactful as mastery and vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion can still have an impact upon efficacy beliefs. Bandura, however, felt that the debilitating effects of persuasive messages are more powerful than the facilitative effects. Verbal persuasion can broadly be divided into two specific sources internal (self-talk) and external (from others). From an external perspective the feedback provided to individual performers is seen as being crucial to either developing or underpinning feelings of confidence.The source of the feedback is also important. Messages communicated from important individuals (such as the coach or a loved one) can be far more impactful than feedback from other individuals.There is another interesting finding in the self-efficacy literature relating to the provision of false or fake feedback. Indeed, evidence suggests that fake feedback can impact upon efficacy beliefs in a similar way to honest feedback. In terms of the content, the recommendation is that feedback should focus on the progress made (relating to specific goals) rather than on outcome, though this is less true for experts.

Physiological states

Interventions that are built upon this source of efficacy beliefs focus on teaching the performer to appraise their physiological state, and interpret their sensations in a rational way. This process would explore the physical sensations experienced by the individual and seek to rationalize their interpretation, ultimately seeking to characterize these sensations as being facilitative and positive for performance. One technique that has been applied in achieving this outcome is reappraisal. This technique involves developing the individual performer’s ability to reappraise their physiological arousal symptoms. This reinterpretation of physiological sensations and responses has been suggested to reduce feelings of anxiety and, as a result, avoidance behaviour. This reappraisal process can serve to break the link between negative experience and physiological responses. There are also suggestions in the literature that males and females differ in

34   The impact of confidence on performance

when and where they reappraise, which suggests that the strategies developed need to be individualized. Emotional states

Interventions that seek to influence efficacy beliefs through emotional states seek to understand what the preferred emotional state is (to facilitate performance) and to explore methods to achieving this state prior to performance. To this end strategies have included the use of hypnosis, biofeedback, relaxation, meditation, and focusing techniques. As previously mentioned, positive emotions are linked with an increase in efficacy beliefs and negative emotions are linked with a decrease in efficacy beliefs. Building upon this knowledge a range of interventions can be applied that seek to reduce negative emotions including emotional regulation, relaxation, meditation, and biofeedback training. Mindfulness-based interventions have also been reported to reduce stress, anxiety, and broader psychological distress. Imaginal experiences

The use of imagery has been suggested as an effective technique to build, maintain, and regain confidence. Getting the individual performer to imagine themselves in a similar situation and performing effectively is one way this approach can be effective. However, while the use of imagery can be very successful it is very individualized. There is significant variability between individuals in terms of their imagery ability, the vividness with which they can create images, and even significant variation in terms of the ability to control what is happening in the imagined space. There is also a view expressed in the literature that imagery should not be used with novice performers in early stages of learning. One approach that has been advocated is the use of motivational imagery as a way to enhance the individual’s efficacy beliefs. This approach focuses on imagery scenarios that seek to regulate arousal and anxiety symptoms, which then interacts with physiological states as a source of self-efficacy beliefs. Crucially, imagery in this context can be used to transform the individual’s

The impact of confidence on performance 

35

interpretation of these symptoms from debilitative to facilitative and ultimately influence the affective response experienced.

OVER-CONFIDENCE Generally speaking, over-confidence is a tendency for individuals to place an irrationally excessive degree of confidence in one’s abilities and beliefs, and by association on expectations of success. There is evidence to suggest that individuals are not very good at estimating their performance on trivial topics, topics that are novel to them, or topics outside the realm of their expertise. It is interesting that this inaccuracy leans more towards over- and not underestimation. Also, this tendency to overestimate does not generally disappear with experience. This phenomenon is also not restricted to any particular domain of performance. Over-confidence is also not restricted to a particular domain of expertise having been identified among psychologists, doctors, nurses, investment bankers, engineers, entrepreneurs, lawyers, negotiators, managers, or sports performers. It has also been claimed that expertise actually exacerbates over-confidence, resulting in the phenomenon being a greater issue for expert rather than novice performers. Indeed, many of the conditions faced by experts, for example, abstractly defined goals and decisions that are low in frequency or produce noisy feedback, are exactly the ones that have been linked to biased and overconfident decision-making.

RESILIENT SELF-CONFIDENCE There is an increasing view within performance domains that a confidence that is resilient to setbacks and adversity is a crucial aspect of ongoing successful performance. In a study involving elite performers, resilient (sometimes termed robust) confidence was described as a multidimensional and stable construct that allows performers to deal with setbacks and the constant psychological and environmental challenges that occur in sport. This research conducted by Owen Thomas, Andy Lane, and Kieran Kingston (2011) sought to define and contextualize robust sport-confidence.

36   The impact of confidence on performance

This construct of resilient confidence has been characterized as having six key attributes: it is multidimensional (i.e., made up of different types of confidence); malleable (i.e., responds and reacts to negative factors); durable (i.e., stable over time); built on a strong set of beliefs (i.e., the athlete truly believes in their ability); developed (i.e., not innate but developed over time); and protective (i.e., acting as a buffer against negative factors). These six attributes have subsequently been seen as a foundation upon which resilient confidence can be developed. Sport psychologists Chris Beaumont, Ian Maynard, and Joanne Butt (2015) sought to outline a number of strategies that could be adopted to both develop and maintain robust confidence. Their research specifically focused on interviewing applied psychology consultants, and resulted in six strategies for developing and four strategies for maintaining robust self-confidence. The six core strategies outlined for developing confidence included: developing an understanding and awareness of confidence; logging evidence; manipulating the coaching environment; tailoring the intervention to the individual; using psychological skills (e.g., goal-setting, imagery, reframing/restructuring, focusing on the process, and developing psychological competition plans); and developing an individual’s key strengths. The four strategies reported for maintaining confidence included adherence to developmental programmes, influencing the performers environment (e.g., practice, environmental cues, and working through others), developing stable beliefs, and reinforcing abilities. The findings of this study also broadly supported other recent research that highlighted the importance of increasing self-awareness in performers and to broaden the specific sources of confidence that underpinned the performers’ broader confidence levels.

PERFORMANCE ANXIETY A factor often closely associated with confidence is that of performance anxiety. This manifestation of anxious thoughts and feelings that can influence performance has been reported across a broad range

The impact of confidence on performance 

37

of domains including academic performance, public speaking, sport, acting, the performing arts/dance, and musical performance. There is also a suggestion in the literature that females are up to three times more likely to experience performance anxiety compared to males. Psychologist David Barlow (2000) developed a model of anxiety that outlines three types of vulnerabilities that can account for the development of anxiety or associated mood disorders: generalized biological, generalized psychological, and specific psychological (associated with certain environmental stimuli through learnt processes). Barlow suggested that genetic predispositions and early life experiences can develop general anxiety issues, however, the specific psychological vulnerabilities are necessary to produce specific phobias and anxious responses (such as performance anxiety). In this context anxiety can be triggered by rational concerns or by cues that trigger previous anxiety-producing experiences. Professor Dianna Kenny, in systematically reviewing treatments of music performance anxiety in 2005, outlined the following five core categories of interventions: cognitive, cognitive-behavioural, combined interventions, drugs, and other. Cognitive interventions focused on the use of cognitive strategies such as positive self-talk and cognitive restructuring. ­Cognitive-behavioural interventions focused on the use of standard cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) techniques. Combined techniques highlighted studies that had utilized a combination of interventions such as CBT and biofeedback, or CBT and relaxation techniques. Drug interventions in particular focus on the use of beta-blockers and antidepressants. Other interventions included meditation, biofeedback, music therapy, and hypnotherapy.

GROUP/TEAM CONFIDENCE The nature of team performance requires individuals to work together in the pursuit of a team-level goal or objective. Similar to individual perceptions of competence, team members make judgements about the functioning of the team, the abilities of other team members, and ultimately the potential for team success. Building on the concept

38   The impact of confidence on performance

of self-efficacy Bandura (1997) developed the concept of ‘collective efficacy’ which he described as “a group’s shared belief in conjoint capabilities to organise and execute courses of action required to produce given levels of attainment” (p. 476). These collective beliefs are important as they influence the actions of the individual team members, and by association the broader team. Collective efficacy has been suggested to influence how individuals act as team members, and in particular influencing effort, persistence in the face of failure, and resistance to discouragement. Three specific dimensions of collective efficacy have been suggested: production, activation, and evaluation. Production relates to the period of time prior to performance where the focus should be on developing joint perceptions of capability in the team. This should include perceptions of being prepared, having sufficient availability, and being a strong team. Activation refers to active displays of collective efficacy by the team in performance situations. This includes demonstrating confidence by showing enthusiasm, willpower, persistence, and high team morale. Evaluation relates to the team’s interpretations of shared experiences during performances and in respect of overall outcomes and results. There is also a suggested link between team capabilities and team goals, team affect (mood and emotions), and group motivational processes. Also, teams with higher perceptions of collective efficacy set more challenging performance goals, with teams setting less challenging goals who experience lower levels of collective efficacy (particularly following a team setback). Australian psychologists Catherine Collins and Sharon Parker (2010) have further differentiated between two different types of collective efficacy: team process efficacy and team outcome efficacy. Team process efficacy relates to the team’s confidence in their ability to work collectively. This belief emerges from common experience and reflections about the team’s interactions. This in turn underpins the team’s belief in their ability to work together. Team outcome efficacy relates to the team’s belief in achieving the team’s designated goals, and achieving the required levels of team performance. These

The impact of confidence on performance 

39

beliefs can differ across performance domains and can relate to either the quantity or the quality of team outputs. Team outcome efficacy is seen as being crucial for fulfilling the main reason why the team is working together (to achieve a performance outcome). Collins and Parker also suggested a third related concept that was important to teams that they termed ‘team potency’. Team potency is conceptualized as a global evaluation of a team’s capability that can span multiple domains (broader than the specific performance domain). Team potency is general in its emphasis, referring to the collective belief that the team can be effective (from a process perspective) regardless of the specific context. This differs from team efficacy in that team efficacy relates to a specific domain of team performance. Sources of collective efficacy

As the concept of collective efficacy is similar to self-efficacy, Bandura (1997) suggested that the sources of collective efficacy are likely to be similar as well. So, similar to self-efficacy, past experiences are suggested to be the most powerful source of collective efficacy beliefs. Vicarious experiences have also been suggested as being an important source of collective efficacy. So, if a team sees other similar teams succeeding they are more likely to view their own chances of success favourably. While mastery enactments, verbal persuasion, and vicarious experiences have all been highlighted as impacting upon collective efficacy beliefs (similar to self-efficacy), other sources have been suggested, including the motivational climate within the group and team size. Psychology researcher Katrien Fransen and colleagues (2012) explored the collective efficacy sources reported by volleyball players in Belgium. The authors reported eight internally consistent factors. Within those factors positive supportive communication was reported to be the most predictive factors for positive collective efficacy beliefs. What was very interesting though in this study was the reporting of the factors that could have the biggest negative impact upon collective efficacy beliefs. In the volleyball context negative emotional reactions

40   The impact of confidence on performance

(e.g., player body language) was the most predictive factor of negative collective efficacy beliefs. Other factors impacting collective efficacy

The leadership style adopted in a team can also have an impact upon performance through enhancing collective efficacy. Specifically, leaders can influence efficacy through modelling, encouragement, persuasion, feedback, and enhancing overall team processes. Recent research has also suggested that the leader(s) within a team can impact upon confidence in a number of ways. First, that good leadership can create a stronger sense of ‘us’. Second, that the leader can help to foster a more positive ‘yes we can’ type of attitude. Cohesion has also been highlighted as an important contributory factor, being described as both an antecedent and a consequence of collective efficacy (Kozub and McDonnell, 2000). The reason why cohesion can be seen as an antecedent is because it can elicit a number of changes that can then facilitate enhanced collective efficacy beliefs. Enhancing collective efficacy

As previously highlighted, there is a relationship between cohesion and collective efficacy, as such traditional team building interventions that seek to enhance cohesion (task and social) can be effective in also enhancing the collective efficacy beliefs within the team. Also, collective efficacy beliefs are often built upon perceptions of what other individuals feel. As such, video footage of teammates, coaches, and other significant individuals can be used to positively influence an individual’s perceptions about the team. Transformational leadership has also been highlighted as a particularly effective tool when seeking to enhance collective efficacy beliefs. The main rationale for this is because transformational leaders can provide emotional and ideological explanations that can help to develop a link between the individual identities of team members and the collective identity of the team. Transformational leaders have

The impact of confidence on performance 

41

also been suggested to influence perceptions of the team’s ability, integrity, and communication effectiveness. Good transformational leaders can also enhance collective efficacy by raising awareness in the team of the contributions made by individual team members, and also highlight the value of self-sacrifice for the good of the team. For all of these reasons the quality of the leadership in a team has been highlighted as a good predictor of collective efficacy levels.

OPTIMISM AND PESSIMISM Another factor that is relevant to performance is the general outlook on life adopted by the individual. An individual’s general outlook (optimistic or pessimistic) has been highlighted in a number of domains of psychology as being important, as it can have an impact on performance, health, and well-being. In the performance context general outlook (how optimistic you are) can also serve as a factor influencing the degree to which you are confident in completing a specific task or endeavour. Broadly speaking, the difference between optimists and pessimists relates to their perceptions of future experiences. Those individuals with a positive outlook (optimists) are those who expect good experiences in the future, and those with a negative outlook (pessimists) are those who expect bad experiences. The degree of optimism or pessimism displayed by an individual has been linked to motivation, and the desire to invest effort in a specific direction. Optimistic individuals tend to invest greater effort, whereas pessimistic individuals are more likely to invest less effort. In the psychology literature optimism/pessimism has broadly been explored from two perspectives. In the first, optimism and pessimism are generalized expectations, and are considered to be stable dispositions (traits). Crucially these ‘traits’ determine the ‘favourableness’ with which the individual performer views an event or situation. If the individual has favourable expectations for a situation they will increase their effort to achieve their goal. Dispositional optimism and pessimism are typically assessed by asking individuals whether they expect future outcomes to be beneficial or negative. Individuals

42   The impact of confidence on performance

higher in dispositional optimism are suggested to cope better in pressure situations because of greater psychological adjustment. In the second perspective, optimism and pessimism are viewed as explanatory styles. The explanatory styles in this approach refer to the way the individual explains what happens to them. The individual’s way of explaining their own experiences demonstrates an explanatory style that, from a theoretical point of view, has three fundamental dimensions: permanence, pervasiveness, and personalization. Permanence refers to the belief that negative events (and their antecedents) are permanent. Pervasiveness refers to a tendency to generalize so negative features of the situation are thought to extend to others as well. Personalization refers to whether the individual tends to attribute negative events to their own limitations, or circumstances outside of their control. Individuals who develop ‘learned helplessness’ tend to blame themselves for everything. Performers with an optimistic explanatory style when facing adversity are more likely to view it as a challenge to be overcome and, as a result, develop more confidence for future adversity. Individuals high in optimism also have positive expectancies and believe they have control over their future. Unlike hardiness, which can be developed at any time throughout life, optimism is typically seen as a stable personality trait that is developed during childhood. That said, the optimism literature does highlight that some interventions can be effective in increasing optimism. In particular, positive psychology interventions such as ‘imagining your best possible self’ have been suggested to be effective. Developing optimism

Crucial to the development of an optimistic outlook is fostering the belief that optimism is a state of mind rather than a genetic trait. If this is the case individuals develop the view that they can ‘choose’ to be optimistic. Mindfulness techniques have been suggested as one way in which a more optimistic outlook can be developed. Also, cognitive-behavioural techniques have also been suggested to have a positive impact upon perceptions of optimism. In an organizational

The impact of confidence on performance 

43

context evidence suggests that the use of organizational goal-setting strategies have a positive impact upon reported employee levels of optimism. Optimism interventions that have been tested in psychologyfocused research have adopted a range of different intervention approaches. These include: the ‘best possible self’ intervention, self-compassion training, coping training, positive psychology interventions, cognitive-behavioural approaches, mindfulness, and meditation. The ‘best possible self’ intervention involves developing goals for and visualizing the best possible future self (e.g., imagine yourself in the future, after everything has gone as well as it possibly Table 3.1  Key points to remember about confidence 1. Confidence in your ability to perform is the most important factor – not necessarily being a confident person all the time. 2. There are lots of different ways to get confidence, make sure you understand what works for you. 3. Performance anxiety is a common phenomenon, but can be reinterpreted to be a positive sign. 4. For teams, collective confidence is as important as individual confidence. 5. Optimism can be more productive than pessimism – so be an optimist. Table 3.2  Practical strategies to enhance confidence for performance   1. Understand where your confidence comes from (After XXXX I feel confident).   2. Focus on different aspects of your confidence during your practice (e.g., trying it, listen to the coach tell you about it, how did it feel, what were the physical sensations).   3. Work on your ability to ‘visualize’ yourself being successful.   4. Remember times when you have been successful in the past.   5. Set goals that you can achieve (this gives you confidence).   6. Write down examples of good performance that you can refer back to in the future.   7. Work on developing your mental skills (e.g., positive self-talk).   8. Develop (or stick to) the training plans that have been designed (if you do a plan then you should be in good shape to perform well).   9. For teams, develop a collective understanding of how well the team have prepared. 10.  Similar to individual goals, develop team goals to build confidence.

44   The impact of confidence on performance

could). Psychology researchers John Malouff and Nicola Schutte (2016) conducted a meta-analysis to explore the evidence to support the effectiveness of psychological interventions to increase optimism. The authors concluded that it is possible to increase optimism through psychological interventions. In particular, the ‘best possible self’ intervention showed the largest effect sizes (the greatest impact). However, there was a note of caution, in that there was no indication from the studies reviewed about how long intervention-induced improvements in optimism lasted.

SUMMARY Confidence (in the ability to perform) is a fundamental factor influencing performance under pressure. This is true for both individual and team performances. In both contexts (self-efficacy and collective efficacy) it is important to understand the sources of these beliefs about perceived future success. Once these sources are understood interventions can be developed that either seek to develop or maintain consistent levels of confidence. The development of this robust and resilient confidence appears to be a crucial aspect of performance at the highest level and the key to consistent performance overtime. It is also important to appreciate the impact that global outlook (optimistic or pessimistic) can have, and in particular the impact it can have on perceptions of the ability to achieve successful outcomes either from an individual or from a team perspective. It is also important to recognize that the most influential sources of confidence can differ between individuals. As a result, interventions need to be planned and developed with the needs of the individual performer in mind if potential performance success is going to be maximized.

4 MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION WHEN IT COUNTS

Across different performance domains successful performance is not just dependent on proficient movement control and the successful execution of skills; often effective decision-making is also a core requirement. In this context decision-making can generally be viewed as the process of committing to a particular course of action (choosing one option over another) and relates to the choices that are made when a number of options are available to the performer for selection. In all cases the decisions that are made are influenced by past experiences and the knowledge base the individual performer has of the specific situation. These past experiences can help or hinder decisionmaking, but, generally speaking, will bias the decision-maker either for or against a certain course of action depending on whether that course of action was successful in the past. Another important aspect of making decisions in performance settings is that there is often more than one right decision, and the ‘right’ decision will often differ from individual to individual depending upon their skill level and expertise. Also, the timescale within which a decision is made also varies, as does the underpinning explanation of process which differs depending on whether the decision is time constrained or not. This chapter will explore the decision-making process, and consider how the nature of the context impacts upon the decision made.

46   Making the right decision when it counts

The chapter will also consider what happens to decision-making processes under conditions of pressure, and explore a range of factors that can either directly or indirectly impact upon decision-making.

WHAT IS DECISION-MAKING? As mentioned previously, decision-making (the making of a decision) can be seen as the process of committing to a particular course of action. Often in the broader psychology literature there is a distinction drawn between consciously (reasoned) and non-consciously (intuitive) controlled decision-making. Intuition in this context is seen as “an involuntary, difficult to articulate, affect-laden recognition or judgement that is based on prior learning and experiences and is formed without deliberate or conscious rational choice” (Raab and Laborde, 2011, p. 89). Or more generally, judgments that appear in consciousness quickly do not rely on deep knowledge of reasons for that judgment, and are strong enough to act on.

INTUITIVE AND REASONED DECISION-MAKING As mentioned in the previous section, non-conscious decisionmaking is often described as being intuitive. In seeking to clarify this concept, organizational psychologists Erik Dane and Michael Pratt (2007) suggested that intuitive decision-making is “affectivelycharged judgments that arise through rapid, non-conscious, and holistic associations” (p. 40), essentially suggesting that intuitive processes progress quickly, holistically, and associatively. The ‘affectivelycharged’ aspect reflects the common language term ‘gut-feeling’. This gut-feeling suggests a preference for a specific course of action without a conscious understanding of why. In comparing the two there is a significant difference between intuitive and analytic (reasoned) decision-making. Analytical decision-making involves making decisions based upon an approach where individuals consciously engage with and consider information (either pre-existing or emergent) that

Making the right decision when it counts 

47

is then used as the basis for the subsequent decision that is made. This cognitive process involves identifying and assessing decision-relevant information, evaluating the costs and benefits of possible courses of action, and then making a decision through deliberation. In contrast, intuitive decisions occur via rapid and largely automatic cognitive processes. Analytical thinking/analysis is viewed to be more effortful, and as a result usually a slower process. This is because analytical thinking requires conscious information processing which is more attentionally demanding. Developmental psychologists have argued that the ability to engage in reasoned and analytical decision-making improves as we progress from childhood to adulthood, with the suggestion being that there is a shift in reasoning to become more analytical and less intuitive over time. However, there is an increasing body of research suggesting that sometimes this is not the case, and in some cases children offer better reasoning and analysis than adults. As a way to explain this anomaly, human development psychologists Valerie Reyna and Charles Brainerd proposed a ‘Fuzzy-Trace’ model applied to decisionmaking (2011). This model suggests that one of two different representations is used to process information: gist and verbatim. Gist representations are suggested to be ‘bottom-up’ processes providing representations of the meaning of information or experience. This information is subsequently used for intuitive gist processing. Verbatim representations, in contrast, are precise and detailed representations of the exact information. The Fuzzy-Trace model suggests that most adults will display a ‘fuzzy processing preference’, which means that they rely on the least precise gist representations required to make a decision. This is despite processing both verbatim and gist representations. This model highlights the importance of memory representations in the reasoning process. The model explains inconsistencies or biases in reasoning to be dependent on retrieval cues that access stored values and principles that are gist representations, which can be filtered through experience and cultural, affective, and developmental factors.

48   Making the right decision when it counts

INTUITIVE DECISION-MAKING AND PERFORMANCE Many motor (movement-based) reactions in performance domains are successfully performed in response to the perceived movement sequences of external stimuli, with individual performers unable to discriminate any particular trigger stimuli (explaining why they did what they did). In the sports domain, examples of this almost automatic initiation of a response include the return of serve in elite tennis; rapid table tennis action sequences; batsman in cricket responding to very fast bowlers; blocking actions in volleyball or basketball; and counterattacks in fencing, boxing, and karate. In these contexts, performers often report that their motor reactions evolve from the specifics of the circumstances they find themselves in, without any consciously controlled decision-making. This observed response behaviour (normally under time pressure) is generally reported for experts rather than novices, suggesting that this is a feature of developing expertise rather than being an innate individual difference (see Chapter 2 for further details). This finding, reported in a number of research studies, suggests that experienced performers who operate in dynamic performance environments benefit from earlier stimulus processing which might have developed during repeated exposure to the stimulus in training/practice and during performance as part of a long-lasting implicit learning process. Historically, this non-consciously controlled decision-making for performance has been described as intuitive, though different to the categorization of intuitive decisions presented previously. This concept of intuitive decision-making has been explored in various fields of social life, work, sport, and business. These intuitive decisions are thought to be reactive, effortless, speedy, non-consciously controlled, triggered automatically, and highly sensitive to action contexts. There is some discussion surrounding the area of intuitive decision-making for performance, with some authors suggesting that intuitive decisions emerge as a result of an awareness of some internal and discriminative physiological states that evolve from non-conscious stimulus

Making the right decision when it counts 

49

processing. However, there is a counter view that these physiological states may be an effect of intuitive decision-making rather than the route cause. Researcher Armin Kieble (2006) argued that this stimulus reaction behaviour might be acquired through a two-stage process: a learning stage followed by a performance stage. In the learning stage, internal codes of perceived movement sequences are established and interconnected with motor codes corresponding to the effects of fast motor reactions as an integral part of an implicit learning process. This first stage proceeds through numerous instances in practice and in competition while performers attempt to respond to a given situation in a trial and error mode. As a consequence, a non-conscious association between the perceived movement structures and motor processes that lead to successful motor reactions are established. Only those associations that have previously consistently led to successful performance are strengthened. In the second performance stage, the mere perception of a movement sequence activates the previously established perceptual motor representation and therefore primes a motor response without any necessary conscious control. For performance reactions primed by the perception of non-conscious movement stimuli, such a learning process may take place during numerous instances in training and in competition. Kieble (2006) further argued that this priming approach overcomes the shortcomings of existing theories and comprehensively addresses the phenomena of intuitive decision-making. Evidence from implicit learning research suggests that individuals decrease their learning performance when instructed to search for features and information that they cannot identify. As a result, coaches and instructors should advise these individuals to pay non-specific attention to areas where the relevant movement feature configurations are located rather than direct attention to specific cues. Also, performers should be advised to execute motor responses during any perceptual skill training in order to produce action codes, including a perceptual as well as a relevant motor part.

50   Making the right decision when it counts

EXPLANATIONS FOR THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS In the broader psychological literature three main perspectives have been adopted in seeking to understanding the process of decisionmaking for action: classic decision-making theory, naturalistic decision-making theories, and ecological approaches. Each of these perspectives offers a different, slightly contradictory perspective of the underpinning mechanisms to decision-making. This is in part because each of these different approaches has developed focusing on different aspects of the human decision-making repertoire. If taken together all three can help to better understand human decisionmaking more holistically.

Classic decision-making theory

This perspective views decision-making as a structured and highly cognitive process. This approach focuses on the accuracy of the decisions made and assumes that, in all decision-making settings, the correct decision outcomes can be identified through a process of rational analysis. According to this approach, decision-making is a relatively straightforward and formulaic process. This process of making an effective decision includes a clear identification of the problem, the generation of a range of possible solutions, critical evaluation of these options, and the selection of a preferred solution. This approach to decision-making does appear to successfully describe the process where there are limited or no time constraints. This line of reasoning suggests that errors occur when an individual fails to adequately consider all the relevant information or evaluate the information in an appropriate way. This failure results in a non-optimal search of all the available courses of action. Indeed, this perspective suggests that the longer the decision-maker takes to arrive at a decision the greater the likelihood that they will make a successful (effective decision). A crucial limitation of this perspective on the decision-making process has been a failure to consider

Making the right decision when it counts 

51

the decision-making task, and the environment in which the decision needs to take place. Naturalistic decision-making

The naturalistic decision-making approach is concerned with how individuals use their experience to make decisions in real-world environments. Of particular interest in this approach is the importance of expertise within the decision-making domain, and the importance of understanding decision-making in its context (what task constraints influence the decisions that are taken). This perspective has emerged as a framework with which to better understand the processes that expert decision-makers engage in under time-pressured conditions. There are a number of different models and theories that exist under this broad umbrella, that share some common principles. First, decisions are made by holistic evaluation of potential courses of action. Second, decisions are recognitionbased in that the decision-maker relies on recognition of the situation and pattern-matching courses of action rather than comparing alternatives. Third, decision-makers adopt a satisfying criterion rather than search for an optimal solution, searching for a workable rather than optimal solution. One example of this approach is the Recognition Primed Decision (RPD) model developed by Gary Klein, a consultant psychology research associate who developed the model to explain the ability of fire ground commanders to make rapid and effective decisions without generating and evaluating a large set of options. This model describes expert decision-making with two general processes. First, there is a retrieval of a course of action based on pattern recognition. The decision-maker is seeking to identify patterns in the environmental cues they are experiencing. When the current situation matches a prior experience the relevant memory is retrieved. This retrieval is then followed by an evaluation of this course of action through mental simulation. This process results in either the adoption (modified

52   Making the right decision when it counts

or unmodified) or rejection of the course of action. If rejected, the decision-maker then evaluates another potential course of action. A nested model of decision-making

Andrew Abraham and Dave Collins, experts in coaching and performance (2011), in an attempt to understand the contribution that both naturalistic and classical approaches make to our understanding of the decision-making process, argued that both explanations are crucial in performance environments. The authors suggested that performers (sports performers, in particular) use both classical and naturalistic decision-making, but that the emphasis between the two can change depending on the situational and environmental factors present at any given moment in time. Abraham and Collins suggested that judgement and decision-making exist in tandem, and as such presented their nested model which is seen to provide context to both naturalistic and classical approaches to explaining decision-making behaviour. In this nested model, Abraham and Collins outlined three different levels at which decision-making occurs based on the time available (time pressures) to make the decision and the duration of the event that the decision impacts upon. At one extreme (where there is sufficient time and the decision is covering a long period of time) then the classical approach is dominant, and at the other extreme (where there is limited time available for an instantaneous task) then the naturalistic approach is dominant. The other key factor the nested model explores are the different levels of a decision, and how each of the different levels is interrelated; recognizing that very rapid perceptual responses are still underpinned by prior tactical decisions within the specific performance context, and these are further underpinned by philosophical decisions that are relevant for the individual in that specific context. Ecological approaches

The ecological approach focuses on the lawful relations (i.e., relations based in the natural sciences) between any individual and

Making the right decision when it counts 

53

the environment in which he or she functions. In this ecological approach, decisions are no longer just the result of internal cognitive processes but are self-organizing processes that emerge as a consequence of the individual’s non-linear interaction with their environment. The perception and the action are viewed like an irreducible cycle, specifically, that it is not necessary to follow a mental process to produce the required decisions; instead decisions emerge spontaneously out of the non-linear interaction of the elements under influence of personal, task, and environmental constraints that form each specific context. Ecological psychology theorists assume a performer environment, in which both components combine to form a whole ecosystem. Under this synergy, it is suggested that biology and physics combine with psychology to define a science at a new ecological/ environmental scale. This ecological approach suggests that performers in dynamic environments cannot completely plan their specific actions in advance (plans represent only one way of constraining the emergence of actions). Nor can individual performers merely react to information in the environment and perform actions based on the interaction of local constraints. The decision-making behaviour of successful performers must, as a result, be eminently anticipatory and cyclical, based on the perception of the key information sources from both the performers’ actions and the external performance environment. Through the search for relevant information to achieve specific competition goals, performers can induce the occurrence of certain interactions with the environment that can then facilitate goal achievement. For this to happen, the performance context needs to offer affordances or possibilities for the performers’ actions. Perception-action couplings occur at the expense of others, primarily because of the existence of a specific set of interacting constraints that influence the emergence of certain decisions. In seeking to apply this theoretical perspective, motor control theorists Duarte Araújo, Keith Davids, and Robert Hristovski (2006) suggested that to make a decision is to direct the course of personal interactions with the environment towards a goal. It is through this

54   Making the right decision when it counts

cyclical process of searching for information to act and acting to acquire information that decisions emerge. The effectiveness of decisions is therefore clearly constrained by the level of attunement of each performer to the relevant information and the respective calibration of his or her movements to that information. If this perspective is adopted, the process through which the individual performer perceives the environment and identifies the correct energy flows becomes of paramount importance to the development of decisionmaking ability.

FACTORS INFLUENCING DECISION-MAKING UNDER PRESSURE A range of factors have been highlighted as important in influencing the decision-making process, including the environment, time pressures, the nature of the task, risk-taking behaviour, thinking style, memory, emotion, and the existing domain-specific knowledge. Often the specific ‘context’ in which the decision is made is highlighted as being crucial in understanding decision-making behaviour. The term ‘context’ is used to refer to the characteristics of decisionmakers, decision-specific characteristics, and the features of the external environment. Other factors highlighted as impacting upon decision-making in performance environments include the degree of ambiguity and risk present at the time that the relevant decision is taken. Research evidence from a diverse range of professions, including firefighting, nuclear power safety monitoring, aviation, military, medicine, and paramedics, has shown how domain-specific knowledge has helped the decision-making process under pressure. Another factor that impacts upon decision-making is the environment itself. This is because natural dynamic situations contain a lot of potential uncertainty and continuously evolving flows of information. Emotion

It is well established in the psychological literature that emotion plays an influential role in the decision-making process. There is a range

Making the right decision when it counts 

55

of evidence highlighting that emotions can cause biases in decisionmaking. For example, the way that human memory works makes it easier to recall experiences that are congruent with the current emotional state. It has also been suggested that emotions bias the value attached to certain outcomes. For example, negative emotions enhance the valuation of short-term outcomes regardless of the negative long-term consequences. Overall positive feelings and emotion tend to be associated with optimistic decision-making and negative feelings and emotion with pessimistic choices. Researchers Jennifer Lerner and Larissa Tiedens (2006) specifically explored the impact of anger on both judgement and decision-making. They suggested that the impact came not only from the valence/arousal component of the emotion but also from appraisal tendencies associated with that emotion. Lerner and Tiedens (2006) further highlighted that anger has specific impacts on outcome effects (e.g., anger leads to increased risk-taking and optimism) and process effects (e.g., anger-selective processing of information). Traditionally, emotion has been thought to have a negative impact on decision-making ability. However, studies in some brain injury patients have revealed that emotion is an indispensable part of adaptive decision-making. For example, on a gambling task conducted by cognitive neuroscience researchers Antoine Bechara, Daniel Tranel, and Hanna Damasio (2000) that represented real life decisions, patients with lesions on the ventral-medial prefrontal cortex selected extremely high-risk options, even when these options were accompanied with a chance of severe future punishment. The patients in the study demonstrated deficits in experiencing emotions and making advantageous decisions. These same patients also failed to generate anxious symptoms (e.g., anticipatory skin conductance response – sweating) when they were about to make risky decisions. These findings provide evidence that emotion is critical to optimal decision-making, and support Hanna Damasio’s (1994) ‘somatic marker’ hypothesis which claims that individuals rely on somatic markers (i.e., physiological responses to situations of gain or loss to make value relevant decisions, not simply on cool reason). From this

56   Making the right decision when it counts

view, anticipatory skin conductance responses and other autonomic responses serve as warning signals from the body for unfavourable decisions. Although individuals may not have conscious awareness of such warning signals from their body, the generation of these anticipatory autonomic responses has been demonstrated to reduce the selection of risky unfavourable options. Time pressure

There is extensive evidence that decision-making under time pressure influences the probability of choosing an alternative solution or choice. Time pressure reduces a decision-maker’s flexibility by hampering their ability to generate alternative hypotheses and hypothesistesting strategies, as such in time-pressured environments effective rather than optimal decisions are sought as solutions to presenting problems. Reviews of time pressure have identified a number of ways in which decision-making changes when time is limited including a reduction in the quality of decision-making, when more conservative options are encouraged, and a reduction in the propensity to take risks. Risk-taking

Recent advances in psychological research have explored the links between emotion and decision-making, with a particular focus on emotional regulation and decision-making. Often distinctions are made in the psychology literature between cold decision-making (involving the deliberate calculation of risks and benefits) and hot decision-making (emotional reactions and gut feelings). There is also a suggestion that for adolescent populations the presence of others (peers) increases the likelihood of risky decisions being made. This follows the generally held developmental psychology view of risk awareness, in that it develops slowly through to adulthood. Indeed, there is a suggestion that there is a direct relationship between risktaking and age that presents itself as an ‘inverted U’ with the high

Making the right decision when it counts 

57

point during adolescence. In this context a ‘risky’ decision is seen as one that has a lower probability of success when compared to other available courses of action. The concept of risk perception is also important. What is perceived as being risky by one individual is not necessarily seen the same way by someone else. Psychologists Drew Westen and Pavel Blagov (2007) suggested that every decision that individuals take can be viewed as an act of emotion regulation, making the point that the goal of any decision can be to minimize future negative affective states and/or maximizing future positive effective states. Initial results in this domain have suggested that emotion regulation through the use of cognitive strategies can reduce risk-taking and riskier courses of action (decisions). The characteristics of the decision-maker, the decision domain, and decision context have specifically been highlighted as important in impacting upon risk-taking behaviour. As a result, understanding the ‘who?’ and ‘when?’ of decision-making under pressure appears crucial. Differentiation is also made between the psychological processes involved, with reference often made to cold (deliberative calculus) or hot (emotive and affective) processes. These processes can influence decision-making in a number of ways. First, by directing the individual performers’ attention to different perceptual cues. Second, by influencing the translation of probabilities and outcomes into subjective values. Third, by influencing the decision process directly, such as resisting temptation. However, when seeking to put this into practice the results exploring risk perceptions in various performance domains have been a little contradictory, though this is often based on a consideration of domain-specific comparative optimism, which specifically relates to what an individual thinks their chance of success is relative to their peers. This domain specific comparative optimism is both different to, and separate from, dispositional optimism (see Chapter 3 for further details). The situation-specific comparative optimism involves rating one’s own risk relative to that of the average peer and as a result can vary from one event to another. For example, rock climbers have assessed their vulnerability of getting seriously injured either

58   Making the right decision when it counts

similarly to or higher than their peers (Martha, Sanchez, and Gomà-iFreixanet, 2009). However, research exploring the perceptions of skydivers reported a comparative optimism as they assessed their vulnerability of getting injured lower than their peers (Moen and Rundmo, 2005). This comparative optimism has also been observed in other domains including driving, in relation to criminal acts, and in relation to health risks. It has been suggested that an individual’s perceived comparative risk may then be related to how people perceive safety recommendations (and as a result, potentially adopt cautious behaviour). Thinking style and decision-making

It has been suggested that the strength of the relationship between a thinking style (or processing type) and a decision outcome may be influenced by the degree of compatibility between the characteristics of the thinking style and the task. Dual process theories of cognitive attribution outline two distinct types of information processing: intuitive and reflective. Intuitive processing is automatic, fast, preconscious, associative, and autonomous (not requiring working memory), whereas reflective processing is seen as being relatively slow, effortful, conscious, analytical, rules-based, and requiring working memory. Contemporary theory suggests that the processes operate sequentially in decision-making, though it has been suggested that these processes are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, Wendy Phillips and colleagues (2016) have suggested that tasks can be classified on a cognitive continuum ranging from intuitive to analytic, and the tasks position on the continuum determines the type of information processing required. Memory

A specific relationship has been highlighted in the psychological literature between working memory and decision-making, with the suggestion that the better an individual’s working memory the quicker

Making the right decision when it counts 

59

(and more effectively) they should be able to make decisions. One model that seeks to explain this relationship is the Preferences as Memory framework as outlined by Elke Weber (2006). This approach suggests that choices are made based upon the retrieval of relevant knowledge from memory, but that the complexity of the system dictates that there is never one optimal choice. The process of memory integration determines the individual’s preferences for specific alternatives, with preferences formed when individuals retrieve from memory a set of questions regarding the attributes of alternative choices. The choice made is influenced by the order in which the benefits of each option are evaluated, and whether the negative or positive possibilities are considered first. The wording of the question can also have an impact. This is because the framing of a question primes different components of the memory system. Developing decision-making under pressure

Central to the notion of enhancing decision-making for performance is the concept of knowledge. Enhancing the performer’s knowledge base has been suggested to be a crucial aspect of enhancing decision-­ making ability, both in terms of intuitive and reasoned decision-­making. Knowledge can broadly be categorized as being either procedural or declarative. Declarative knowledge refers to information about the facts, figures, rules relations, and concepts in the task domain. In contrast, procedural knowledge is described as the steps, procedures, sequences, and actions required for task performance. In simple terms, procedural knowledge refers to the ‘how to’ aspects of task performance, whereas declarative knowledge refers to the ‘what and why’. Based upon this distinction, procedural knowledge is manifest in the performance of motor skills. Declarative knowledge is manifest in knowing the rules, and relies on access to both the episodic and semantic memory systems. In this context episodic memory relates to personal memories about experiences (long-term memory). This memory system will hold information about specific events, times, and places, and crucially what the performer did, and the strategies

60   Making the right decision when it counts

that were employed to achieve a specific outcome. Semantic memory, by contrast, consists of more general knowledge about the world and the relationships that exist within it. This explanation suggests that in performance settings knowing how and why (declarative knowledge) might be easier to develop than the ability to execute the skills (procedural knowledge).

DECISION-MAKING IN TEAMS In order for teams to be able to make coherent and effective decisions during performance there needs to be a shared understanding of the situation and of how to respond to specific contexts or events. Shared mental models are seen as one way to achieve this shared understanding. Simulation and training experts Janis Cannon-Bowers and Eduardo Salas (2001) described shared mental models to be “knowledge structures held by members of a team than enable them to form accurate explanations and expectations for the task, and in turn to coordinate their actions and adapt their behaviour to demands of the task and other team members” (p. 228). The assumption here is that team decision-making performance will improve if team members have a shared understanding of four key factors: knowledge about equipment; understanding of the team task (i.e., goals, performance requirements, and problems to be solved); awareness of the team’s composition and resources (i.e., beliefs, preferences, skills, and habits); and the team decision-making process (how the team goes about selecting specific courses of action). Three specific types of knowledge are suggested to be required in order to develop effective shared mental models within the team: declarative knowledge; procedural knowledge; and strategic knowledge. Declarative knowledge is seen as the facts, figures, rules, and ideas that exist relating to the specific task. Procedural knowledge relates to the steps, sequences, and actions that are needed for the team to perform the task. Strategic knowledge is the overriding task strategies and knowledge required to be successful, and, crucially, knowing when to apply them.

Making the right decision when it counts 

61

Developing tactical and strategic decision-making in teams

A number of different approaches have been suggested in terms of developing tactical decision-making in performance teams including the following: Teaching Games for Understanding (TGFU), Decision Training, and the Situation Model of Anticipated Response Consequences of Tactical training (SMART). Teaching games for understanding

The TGFU approach focuses on tactical training, building on the assumption that tactical awareness is composed of making correct decisions in skill execution (how to do it), and skill selection (what to do). The main focus of this approach is the practicing of ‘real’ or modified versions of team performance. This approach to decisionmaking development could be described as ‘cognition-to-technique’ in that it begins with understanding the tactical problems of the specific team performance domain. Decision training

American sport psychologist Joan Vickers suggested a three-step model to underpin the process of decision training. The decision training approach, while continuing to emphasize the importance of technical and physiological development, places a particular emphasis on the development of underpinning cognitive skills. Activities in this approach are designed to utilize ‘tactical whole training’ where skills are trained within tactically orientated drills that emphasize the ‘real’ tactical context of the performance environment. In the first step of the model, the individuals designing the practice environment need to identify decisions that the individual needs to make in the real performance environment. According to this approach it is crucial to identify one ‘key’ cognitive skill required to make the decision, and to focus on training/developing that skill. Seven ‘core’ cognitive skills have been

62   Making the right decision when it counts

suggested including: anticipation, attention, pattern recognition, focus and concentration, memory, problem-solving, and decision-making. The main rationale for this approach is that attentional resources are limited. In step two, a drill is designed to train that skill within a simulated performance setting. As part of the design a ‘cognitive trigger’ is identified to give feedback on the response selection process (decision). Vickers suggested the following seven cognitive triggers: object cues; location cues; the quiet eye; memory cues; reaction times; kinaesthetic cues; and self-coaching cues. In the third step one of seven decision tools are used to train the decision in a variety of contexts. These tools include the following: variable practice; random practice; bandwidth feedback; questioning; video feedback; hard-first instruction and modelling; and an external focus of instruction. The SMART model

The SMART model developed by Marcus Raab in 2007 advocates the use of both implicit and explicit learning processes depending on the complexity of the situation. The basic underlying principles to this approach are that decisions in performance teams are developed through the mapping of a situation, the movement, and the effect on the environment. In this model implicit or explicit recognition leads to an option generation, this in turn informs a choice, which ultimately results in an effect of the choice (outcome). This model suggests a learning dimension and a domain dimension. Implicit and explicit learning are differentiated by the use of instruction in the teaching process. Explicit learning only takes place if rules are verbalized explicitly. The model is domain-specific in that it requires either implicit or explicit recognition of specific situations to enable option generation and choices. Knowledge-based interventions

Researchers Sue McPherson and Michael Kernodle (2003) suggested that experts develop the ability to make better decisions through the

Making the right decision when it counts 

63

generation of both action plan profiles and current event profiles. These action plan profiles are used by the performer to activate general domain-specific rules for decision-making. So, if a certain condition should occur (a tennis player is at the back of the tennis court) then the performer must respond in a certain way. Current event profiles contain tactical scripts and situation prototypes that guide the response process. Information about past, current, and future events Table 4.1  Key points to remember about decision-making 1. A decision is choosing a specific course of action. 2. Intuitive decisions are based upon experience and knowledge – so the more you have the more likely your ‘gut feeling’ will be an effective decision. 3. Often you are looking for an effective rather than ideal decision. 4. Your emotional state can impact your decisions, so the calmer you are the more likely you are to make effective decisions. 5. In teams, developing a ‘shared understanding’ is crucial so everyone is ‘on the same page’ when it comes to making decisions.

Table 4.2  Practical strategies to decision-making for performance   1. Remember, decision-making is not just about the choice you make, but the ability to execute the required skills – so practice both!   2. The more you experience the ‘real environment’ the more intuitive some decisions become.   3. For decisions that have thinking time, talk through options with relevant ‘experts’ during practice.   4. For ‘instant’ decisions it is still important to talk through options of what you could do (but do this outside of practice).   5. Tiredness affects decision-making, so as much as possible make sure you are rested, fit, and healthy.   6. Other factors such as hydration, nutrition, and oxygen all also impact upon decision-making – so stay hydrated, and eat a balanced diet.   7. Making decisions under pressure is hard, try to practice your decisions beforehand (e.g., penalty kicks in football).   8. For team decisions, make sure everyone in the team understands each other’s role and what they need to do in order for the team to be successful.   9. Have an agreed ‘style’ that makes it easier for the team to make similar decisions (or to predict what decision a teammate will make). 10. Practice, practice, practice!

64   Making the right decision when it counts

is stored in the performer’s memory and monitored for activating or updating as appropriate. These current event profiles provide the performer with access to more recent information through specialist processes that link previous experiences to the current domainspecific situation. Based on this, improvements in anticipation and decision-making are underpinned by changes in perceptual-cognitive skills, knowledge, and the mechanisms that determine how the brain processes information and controls performance. Understanding how a performer’s knowledge bases can affect decision-making performance could significantly affect the way in which decision-making is taught and developed. For example, if it is simply the case that more knowledge equals better performance, instructors and performers should focus on learning and developing greater levels of knowledge. However, research concerning the issue of knowledge and decision-making performance within specific performance contexts are rare.

SUMMARY Decision-making is a fundamental aspect of performance. Crucially, it is not only about the selection of the right choice, and knowing what to do (declarative knowledge); just as important is knowing how to execute the required skills (procedural knowledge). The recognition that memory plays a significant role in the decisions made is also important, and especially that these memories, and even the recall and interpretation of these memories, are not fixed. Rather they change and evolve through interactions with other factors such as emotions experienced. A clear understanding of the decision-making process and influencing factors is the first step to developing effective decision-making for performance and crucially in the design of decision-making training environments for both teams and for individuals.

5 FACTORS DETERMINING PSYCHOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE A broad range of factors have been suggested as having an impact upon performance. Many of these factors are psychological in nature and operate at an individual level. For example, the mindset of the performer is seen as a fundamental influencing factor. Linked to the importance of mindset is the individual’s ability to develop an ‘optimal mindset’ for performance: a state of mind that enables the performer to execute these skills effectively under pressure. There are also factors at a psychological ‘structural’ level that can influence performance, including nutritional intake and rest and recovery (e.g., quality and duration of sleep). Beyond the broader notion of mindset there are also a range of specific psychological skills and techniques that can influence performance. For example, the ability to cope with pressure is crucial, as are the complementary psychological skills of goal-setting, relaxation and meditation, imagery, self-talk, and the development of pre-performance routines. From a team perspective, factors that can have a positive impact upon performance outcomes include: role clarity, leadership, and cohesion. Team emotion can also have a significant impact. This chapter will explore each of these specific factors in detail, considering the impact they have upon performance, and how this knowledge can be used to facilitate improved performance outcomes.

66   Factors determining performance

INDIVIDUAL FACTORS Mindset

The way in which individuals view the world has been cited as a crucial factor influencing the chance of sustained success. Carol Dweck, a professor of psychology at Stanford University, an expert in personality psychology, conceptualized two different ‘types’ of people depending on how they viewed their talents and abilities. These ‘types’ were based upon the mindset of the individuals who Dweck characterized as being either ‘fixed’ or ‘growth’. Those individuals with a fixed mindset are suggested to believe that talent and ability are simply fixed. The perspective of these individuals is that they have a certain amount of ability and that’s that. In this mindset, performers can become so focused on being and looking talented that they never fulfil their actual performance potential. Individuals with a growth mindset view talent and ability as resources that can be developed through effort, practice, and instruction. Talent is viewed as something that can be built on and developed, not something that is fixed. Research has repeatedly reported that a growth mindset fosters a healthier attitude towards practice and learning, a hunger for feedback, a greater ability to deal with setbacks, and improved performance over time. Dweck further suggested that adopting a fixed mindset can be problematic for two key reasons. First, of crucial importance to these individuals is ‘looking’ talented/intelligent at all costs. This results in an approach to practice that is underpinned by a desire to not spend too much time practicing. This is for two reasons: first, ability is fixed (so practice won’t make much difference); second, that the less practice you need the even greater your natural ability must be. This view of the world can be seen in talented performers who are early developers. They fail to learn to work hard, and as a result when the late developers catch up, the early developers are left behind. Second, there is a tendency for fixed mindset individuals to try to conceal or ignore failures or deficiencies. This approach means that they do not improve in these areas, self-limiting their future performance potential. Dweck outlined three key advantages to adopting a growth mindset. First, the core focus for growth mindset individuals is to learn.

Factors determining performance 

67

This view of the world is built upon the belief that you can always get better (through practice). As such, the greater the investment in practice, the greater the potential performance benefits. These individuals will take control of the learning process, maximizing the benefits of the time they do spend learning and practicing. Second, effort is key to future success, so passion and dedication will affect outcome. Finally, growth mindset individuals seek to embrace their mistakes (and learn from them) and confront their deficiencies. Optimal mindsets

Often when performing well, individuals achieve a state of mind where everything feels ‘easy’, and there is a supreme confidence that there will be a successful performance outcome. When experiencing this state, performance is easy, and the individual does not need to think about what they are doing, but at the same time they are not easily distracted. This ‘optimal performance state’ is sometimes referred to as being in ‘the zone’ or as experiencing ‘flow’. Specifically, this feeling of flow relates to an internal process that lifts the experiences from the ordinary/normal to the optimal. In looking to clarify in more detail what flow is, psychology researchers Susan Jackson and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1999) suggested that performers are in flow when: They know what to do and believe they can succeed. There is order in their mind, with clear goals focusing their thoughts so intensely that not enough attention is left over to even worry about themselves or their problems. Concentration is directed totally toward the activity. The players are so in tune with what they are doing that they quickly notice the finest nuances of their game and make adjustments to stay in the groove. This notion of flow is really the experiencing of a number of key psychological factors at the same time, where the body and mind appear to be working together effortlessly. Interestingly, the experience of flow is not an all-or-nothing experience; instead flow exists

68   Factors determining performance

on a continuum from a little to a lot. A core aspect of flow is that there needs to be a balance in the individual’s view of the challenge of the task (how difficult it is) and the degree of skill that they possess (whether they are up to the job). Further research conducted in psychology has identified a number of specific aspects to flow, including: • • • • • • • • •

The balance between challenge and skill level, A merging of action and awareness (it just happens), Having clear goals, Receiving clear feedback, Being totally focused on the task at hand, Having a sense of control over the situation, Experiencing a loss of self-consciousness, Losing sense of ‘normal’ time, and Simply enjoying the moment.

Building on these factors, a number of specific techniques have been recommended to increase the likelihood of experiencing this flow state. These include the following: • Being motivated to perform well, • Achieving an optimal physiological arousal level prior to performance (e.g., controlling heart rate), • Having pre-game and during-the-game plans so there is clarity in what you are going to do at specific points in time, • Knowing you have done the training and feeling ready (so make sure you have done the training to feel ready), • Having an optimal environment (support staff, team setup, physical facilities), • Having a strong focus (what is your driver?), • Feeling confident in your ability (underpinned by a positive mental attitude), • Having a positive team environment (supportive and good communication), and • Having experience as a competitor and having experienced flow in the past.

Factors determining performance 

69

Mental factors that can limit performance

There are a number of psychological factors that can affect performance. Indeed, a number of these factors that can have an impact upon psychological performance can be viewed broadly as being ‘external’. For example, the quality of rest and recovery is a key influencing factor, the most important aspect of which is sleep. Reductions in either the quantity or quality (or both) of sleep can have a significant impact on psychological performance. Just one night of sleep deprivation reduces cognitive activity, alertness, reaction time, ability to focus, and general cognitive performance. Also, when tired there is also a reduced ability to control emotions. The food and drink consumed by an individual also have an effect on psychological performance. In particular, the importance of micronutrients to the brain has been highlighted. Deficiencies in key vitamins and minerals can have a fundamental impact on psychological performance. There is evidence that suggests that for people whose diets are deficient in key vitamins and minerals, taking multivitamin supplements can have a positive impact upon psychological performance. However, there is no evidence to support ‘over supplementation’. Indeed, consuming high levels of specific vitamins and minerals can have a significant adverse impact upon general health and well-being. The time at which food is consumed will also have a potential impact upon psychological performance. There is a relatively consistent finding in psychological research that there is a decrease in performance after a midday meal. This ‘post-lunch dip’ has a greater impact upon tasks that require sustained attention (such as listening in a class or meeting). Building upon this point, the nutritional content of the meals consumed also makes a difference. For example, there is evidence that suggests that high carbohydrate breakfasts can improve morning performance. However, the timing of carbohydrate consumption is an important consideration. Further research has reported that lunches high in carbohydrates can produce a greater reduction in attention and reaction time when compared to meals that have a higher fat content. However, you need to make sure you don’t have too much of a good

70   Factors determining performance

thing, as very high-fat lunches can result in feelings of drowsiness, confusion, and uncertainty. Beyond these ‘external’ factors there are a number of key internal factors that can also affect psychological performance. Central to this is the experience of pressure and the associated feelings of stress and anxiety. This pressure is considered an ‘internal’ factor because the concept of pressure is something that is internally constructed. The more pressure you experience, the greater the potential impact on performance. One negative side effect of pressure is a tendency to ‘over think’ performance. Richard Masters (1992) a professor of psychology suggested a ‘reinvestment’ process. Masters argued that under pressure a condition called ‘deautomatization’ can result, which causes an unravelling of skills execution. The term deautomatization in this context has been used to describe a disruption of the automatic execution of skilled performance. This outcome occurs when the individual performer tries to execute a skill using explicitly available knowledge, a process described as a ‘reinvestment of actions and perceptions with attention’. The term ‘paralysis by analysis’ has been used to describe this phenomenon and it can have an impact at all levels up to the most highly skilled performers. Coping

In its simplest form coping relates to the ability to deal with events and experiences. Psychology professors Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman (1984) describe coping as “constantly changing cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person” (p. 141). Of particular interest when focusing on performance is the ability to cope with pressure, setbacks, and stress. Coping with pressure relates to the ability to deal with the perceived pressure of the situation; coping with setbacks relates to the ability to deal with things going wrong; and coping with stress relates to the ability to cope with the stress that might be experienced while under pressure. In all three

Factors determining performance 

71

cases, though, it is not quite so straightforward, because there are two important aspects to the interpretation of the situation. The first is how intense the stress and pressures are, and how big the setback. The second relates to the ability to cope. One performer might be able to cope with a major setback quite easily, while another performer could find it difficult to cope with a relatively minor setback or stressful event. The reason for this is that there appears to be significant inter-person variability in the ability to cope with specific events, and this ability to cope also changes over time, so a performer who could cope well at point A might not be able to cope with a similar situation at point B. Generally speaking, those individuals who are successful over an extended period of time have developed their own strategies to cope with pressure, setbacks, and stress. The most effective strategy to be able to cope is not really coping per se at all. Indeed, if a performer can change the way they view or interpret a specific situation they can develop the ability to not experience pressure, and to not feel stressed. Pressure as a physical concept relates to the application of a force or load to stress an object. The psychological concept of pressure is self-determined. Pressure is predominantly perceived to relate to the expectations of others, such as family, friends, teammates, colleagues, leaders, and managers. However, it is the perception of these expectations that is important. It is often the fact that the individual cares what these external parties think that makes the situation pressured. There can also be internal pressure that emerges from the individuals’ wants and desires. Ultimately if the perception of these expectations can be changed the experience of pressure can be moderated. Coping strategies

The psychological literature on coping draws a clear distinction between problem-focused and emotion-focused coping. Problemfocused coping refers to a focus on changing the problem(s) causing distress. Typical approaches to achieving this change include problem-solving and increased effort. Emotion-focused coping adopts

72   Factors determining performance

strategies that seek to regulate the emotional response and resulting distress. Examples of strategies that might be adopted include withdrawal behaviour (retreating from the situation), wishful thinking, denial, and venting (of emotion). Coping resources

Coping resources relates to a range of cognitive, behavioural, and social factors that can help the individual to deal with problems, disappointment, and the stress of life. General coping resources include good quality sleep, fitness levels, nutrition and hydration, and time management. Coupled to this is the view that strong social support can also help performers to deal with the demands of performance, and life more broadly. Part of the reason for this is that this social support is seen to provide a ‘buffer’ against stress. Indeed, the provision of strong social support has been linked to enhanced well-being, a reduction in stress illnesses, enhanced satisfaction, and an improved ability to cope with new challenges. There has also been a more specific classification of social support in the literature, suggesting that social support can be subdivided into emotional support (feeling loved and cared for), tangible support (financial support, lifts, etc.), and informational support (information and advice). Strategies to facilitate performance Psychological skills training

One way to seek to maximize performance is to focus on developing key cognitive psychological skills. Psychological skills training (PST) is a term used to describe a systematic approach to the development of mental (psychological) skills designed to enhance performance outcomes, increase enjoyment, and enhance satisfaction. In order to maximize the impact of these skills it has been suggested that they should be developed in a systematic, goal-oriented, planned, controlled, and evaluated manner. Some authors who have

Factors determining performance 

73

focused on PST have differentiated between psychological skills as the desired outcome (e.g., increased confidence and enhanced ability to focus) and psychological methods or techniques (e.g., imagery and self-talk) as the means to promote the desired outcomes through the systematic application of these techniques. In the last two decades, a variety of specific intervention techniques have been promoted to help performers develop psychological skills to enhance their performance. A range of specific psychological skills have been cited in multiple studies as having the potential to mediate the effect that performing under pressure can have on the individual performer including: imagery, cognitive restructuring, self-talk, relaxation techniques, goal-setting, and focusing/concentration. Goal-setting

The setting of goals, aims, and objectives has consistently been reported across a wide range of domains as contributing to enhanced performance outcomes. Indeed, goal-setting has been described as a highly consistent and robust performance enhancement strategy. This is because evidence suggests that goal-setting can be highly effective in influencing behaviour, motivation, and performance. Research also suggests that goal-setting is particularly effective in enhancing performance and positively affecting behaviour when focusing on a combination of different types of goal. Goal-setting is particularly effective as it influences performance in four distinct ways. First, goals direct attention to important elements of the skills and tasks being performed. Second, goals prolong the efforts of the individual performer and team. Third, goals prolong performer and team persistence. Finally, goal-focused activity can help to foster the development of new learning and problem-solving strategies. Within the goal-setting literature there are generally two main classifications of goals. First, goals are either classified as being outcome, performance, or process focused. Second, goals are referred to as being short-term or long-term. Outcome goals focus on the ultimate outcomes linked to a positive performance, and are, in the

74   Factors determining performance

main, focused on winning. Unfortunately, achieving this type of goal is not necessarily within the performer’s control as the outcome also depends on a range of environmental factors, including the performance of others. As a result, this type of goal can also be stressinducing. Performance goals are linked to the explicit performance of individual performers, such as the achievement of specific personal performance. Process goals are usually focused on how a particular skill is executed. This type of goal is equally useful in both practice and the performance domains. There is evidence to suggest that using a combination of goal-setting strategies (outcome, performance, and process goals) can produce significantly better results than just relying on one type of goal. Along with the three different types of goals outlined above, there is also a distinction drawn between short-term and long-term goals. Long-term goals are seen as ultimate goals. For Olympic athletes it could be winning a medal at the next Olympics in four years. Shortterm goals are more immediate and provide the stepping-stones for achieving the long-term goals. Successful performers should set a mixture of both short-term and long-term goals to be most effective. Indeed, research has revealed that both short-term and long-term goals are needed to maintain motivation and performance in the long term. A number of sources within the broader psychology literature advocate the SMART approach to goal-setting, referring to effective goals as being specific (S), measurable (M), action-related (A), realistic (R), and timetabled (T). Possibly the most important, and often overlooked, aspect of goal-setting is the evaluation and re-evaluation of progress and achievement. This evaluation allows for current progress to be monitored and changes to be made if required to maximize the potential for the goal(s) to be realized. Relaxation and meditation

Depending on the specific mindset required for performance, relaxation techniques and approaches to help the individual performer to relax can also be very effective in facilitating performance. These

Factors determining performance 

75

techniques can be grouped into two main categories, termed ‘muscle to mind’ and ‘mind to muscle’. Muscle to mind techniques include breathing exercises and a progressive muscular relaxation approach (where there is a progressive tensing and relaxing of key muscle groups in the body). Mind to muscle techniques include meditation and autogenic training (underpinned by a series of visualization exercises). Many of these specific techniques have the same broader aims: to seek to decrease oxygen consumption, reduce heart rate and respiration, and to provide a controlled focus of attention. Another associated technique is that of mindfulness. Mindfulness approaches can broadly be divided into two specific camps. The first, advanced by Kabat-Zinn (2003), draws on Buddhist meditative practices and is often labelled as an Eastern approach. Kabat-Zinn’s definition of mindfulness has its roots in Buddhist philosophy, and involves “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally” (p. 4). For those who conceptualize the construct in this way, mindfulness is not the active processing of context-dependent information, but instead is a non-reactive awareness and unconditional acceptance of whatever arises in the present moment. This Eastern conceptualization of mindfulness has been used more widely to date by clinical psychologists, and is the primary perspective underlying approaches to sport performance enhancement. In contrast to Kabat-Zinn’s Eastern approach is the approach to mindfulness developed by Langer and her colleagues (e.g., Langer, 1989) that is considered a Western approach to mindfulness. This approach views mindfulness as a cognitive phenomenon and examines the outcomes of mindfulness and mindlessness as two opposing cognitive states on performance, psychological well-being, and health. Langer conceptualized mindfulness as an active and effortful mode of conscious awareness that requires “a heightened state of involvement and wakefulness” (Langer and Moldoveanu, 2000, p. 2). However, regardless of the conceptualization adopted, the use of mindfulness techniques can increase positive psychological aspects of well-being and improve functioning in healthy people, as well as lessen a range of physical and psychological disorders.

76   Factors determining performance

Imagery

Imagery is one of the most popular psychological skills utilized by performers in preparing for and enhancing performance. Imagery (and visualization in particular) has been shown to be effective in skill learning, preparation for performance, and rehabilitation. The dominant form of imagery used by most performers is visualization, which involves the ‘picturing’ or ‘imagining’ of specific contexts and scenarios. The frequent use of imagery has been reported to be a characteristic of the most successful performers across a broad range of performance domains. It is important to note that while imagery is dominated by visualization, the imagined experience can utilize a variety of senses (e.g., sight, taste, sound). A crucial aspect of imagery is that it is primarily under the conscious control of the individual, which is fundamentally different to dreaming. This allows individuals to experience or re-experience situations in their mind by retrieving information from long-term memory. As with many other psychological skills there is significant interperson variability in its use. This is predominantly due to differences in each individual’s ‘imagery ability’. Imagery ability has been specifically defined by Tony Morris, Michael Spittle, and Anthony Watt (2005) as “an individual’s capability of forming vivid, controllable images and retaining them for sufficient time to effect the desired imagery rehearsal” (p. 60). Everyone has the ability to generate an image, but this may differ between individuals in terms of vividness (how clear the image is), controllability (the degree to which they can change what they see), kinesthetic feelings (does it feel like the real thing), ease, and emotional experience (does it elicit the same core emotions). Studies in the psychology literature confirm that imagery abilities are not universal across individuals, with a varying capacity to generate images depending on imagery mode and perspective (from what position the performer is viewing the imagined scene). Studies have also shown that mental imagery is an ability that improves with practice. Visualization involves seeing the movements required for performance and can be experienced from two different perspectives:

Factors determining performance 

77

external and internal. External visualization involves watching yourself perform the movement as if from another person’s point of view, whereas, internal visualization involves viewing the movement through your own eyes as if actually performing the movement. Self-talk

Self-talk techniques are cognitive techniques that are based on the use of specific verbal cues that aim to facilitate learning and enhance performance through the activation of appropriate responses. There is evidence of the successful use of self-talk to enhance performance across a diverse range of performance domains and contexts. Sport psychologists James Hardy, Emily Oliver, and David Tod (2009) proposed a conceptual framework for self-talk that outlined a range of factors suggested to influence the self-talk – performance relationship. Hardy and colleagues suggested that self-talk improves motor skill execution via four possible mechanisms: cognitive, motivational, behavioural, and affective. Cognitive mechanisms were described as encompassing informational processing and attentional control. Performers have reported using self-talk for a variety of attention-based outcomes (e.g., concentration), and in addition, experimental studies have indicated that manipulating self-talk may be a useful adjunct strategy to alter attentional foci and decrease interfering thoughts. Motivational mechanisms describe a focus on self-efficacy and persistence or long-term goal commitment. Self-talk use has been associated with persistence and subsequent higher performance on challenging tasks. Behaviour mechanisms refer to the direct impact of self-talk on behaviour. Researchers have identified improvements in both subjectively and objectively assessed technique resulting from self-talk. It has also been suggested that during early phases of skill learning, novices may ‘talk’ themselves through movements. Finally, affective mechanisms relate to the potential impact that affect (feelings, moods, and emotions) can have on performance. A number of studies have highlighted a link between cognitive content and affect, and in turn, affect and performance. Evidence suggests that self-talk may also serve to increase self-confidence in a performer.

78   Factors determining performance

Pre-performance routines

A particular approach that has been extensively reported as positively impacting upon performance is the use of preparatory/preperformance routines. Indeed, a number of studies across a range of performance domains have highlighted the positive impact that these preparatory routines can have on performance. These routines have been specifically characterized by Aidan Moran (1996) as “a sequence of task-relevant thoughts and actions which an athlete engages in systematically prior to his or her performance of a specific sports skill” (p. 177). Moran, a professor of psychology at University College Dublin (UCD) specifically differentiated between two different types of ‘distractors’ that he categorized as being either external or internal. Effective pre-performance routines need to be designed to consider both of these sources of distraction to maximize their positive impact. Stewart Cotterill (2015), a sport and performance psychologist at the University of Winchester, reported that preparatory routines are adopted across a range of performance domains including sport, performing arts, and business. In his research he interviewed performers from across a range of performance domains including acting, performing arts, sport, and surgery, concluding that while the structure to the routines was different, the function(s) was similar across performance domains. The existing body of literature relating to routines advocates a number of potential ways in which these routines can aid performance. These include: providing the performer with a specific focus (thus reducing distraction); acting as a trigger for habitual behaviours; diverting attention from irrelevant thoughts; enhancing the recall of the required physical and mental states; preventing performers focusing on the mechanics of the skill (paralysis by analysis); reducing anxiety; and allowing performers to evaluate the environmental conditions and to modify their response accordingly. When seeking to develop effective routines for performance Cotterill highlighted the importance of focusing on the specific needs

Factors determining performance 

79

of the individual performer, rather than trying to implement generalized templates. An important, possibly crucial, component of this process is to understand the existing behaviours of the performer. Unless the performer is a novice regarding their stage of skill development they will already have ingrained pre-performance behaviours. The challenge then to the sport psychology consultant is whether to accept that these behaviours exist and try to work with them, or alternatively to try to impose a new set of behaviours which might be more beneficial to performance. In a further publication, Cotterill (2011), reflecting on developing pre-performance routines with professional cricketers, suggested a six-step approach: (1) understand the task requirements; (2) video performance; (3) clarify the meaning of existing behaviours; (4) develop a function and a focus for each behavioural component; (5) construct the new routine and (6) practice using the new routine.

TEAM FACTORS A range of psychological factors have also been highlighted as impacting upon team performance, including role clarity, leadership approach, cohesion, and team emotion. Role clarity

The understanding by team members of their role in the team has been consistently highlighted as a crucial factor influencing team performance. Eminent Canadian sport psychologist Albert Carron, in his 1998 seminal book Group Dynamics in Sport written with colleagues Heather Hausenblas and Mark Eys, outlined the impact that various aspects of ‘roles’ can have upon performance. Central to this view of roles and performance are the opposing concepts of role clarity and role ambiguity. Role clarity is seen to be facilitative to performance whereas role ambiguity is seen as a limiting factor. Of central importance is the communication of role expectations. What is the specific role? What are the associated behaviours? What does success look like?

80   Factors determining performance

Knowing what the role is, though, is not the end point. There needs to be ‘role acceptance’ by the individual (they both understand and are happy to carry out the role), and ultimately role performance (delivering the behaviours and outcomes required). Also, within a team environment there also needs to be understanding of the roles of other members of the team, and acceptance regarding those roles and the associated behaviours. Role ambiguity refers to a lack of clear consistent information associated with a particular role. Role ambiguity has been shown to be associated with a range of factors including negative affect (negative feelings/emotions); reduced psychosocial well-being; and reduced performance effectiveness. Carron and colleagues further conceptualized role ambiguity as a multidimensional construct composed of ambiguity about the scope of responsibilities, the behaviours necessary to carry out those responsibilities, how role responsibilities are evaluated, and the consequences of not fulfilling the role. It is important when seeking to understand role ambiguity whether it is subjective or objective. Subjective ambiguity refers to perceptions of ambiguity held by the individual, whereas objective ambiguity refers to something that exists in the performance environment. A related concept that can also impact upon team performance is role conflict. Role conflict refers to the presence of incongruent (conflicting) expectations placed on an individual. Different types of role conflict have been identified, specifically intra-role, inter-sender, and person-role conflict. Intra-role results from the expectations in two or more different contexts interfering with each other. Inter-sender conflict occurs when two ‘role senders’ send conflicting messages and set different expectations. Person-role conflict occurs when there is an incompatibility between the demands of the role and the needs/ values of the individual performer. Finally, it is not uncommon for individuals to fulfil more than one role in a team. This is fine as long as they have the appropriate amount of mental resources available. If not, there is the potential for ‘role overload’. Role overload is distinct to role conflict in that it relates to the total volume of work (e.g., number of roles) the individual has to perform.

Factors determining performance 

81

Leadership

Leadership has been described as the process of influencing individuals and groups towards a specific goal or objective; knowing what needs to be done, and influencing others to cooperate to do it. Good leaders have been suggested to be good planners, organizers, and decision-makers, and crucially are able to empower others to action. Good leadership has been consistently highlighted as a crucial factor influencing successful team performance across a broad range of domains. Of particular importance in many performance domains is leadership of a particular group or team. This leadership can be hierarchical (e.g., managers/supervisors and workers) or peer-focused (e.g., team captains, sub-unit leaders) in its nature. There are a significant number of theoretical models that seek to conceptualize and define the leadership process and the effectiveness of leaders. These can generally be distilled down to three key concepts: the nature of the leader, the group(s) they are leading, and the situation/context. To really understand effective leadership, it is crucial to appreciate the interaction between these three concepts. In an ideal world the characteristics of the individual leader would be aligned with the expectations of the group they are leading, and the demands of the situation, but this is often not the case. The question then becomes which compromise is the best to make? A range of factors have been demonstrated to be influenced by strong/effective leadership. For example, it has been suggested that leadership directly influences perceptions of collective efficacy in a team by modelling (of appropriate behaviour and cognitions), encouragement, persuasion, feedback, and an enhancement of team functioning. Also, leaders who are confident in their problemsolving and decision-making, as well as their ability to motivate and influence team members, can increase the feelings of collective efficacy in a team. Transformational leaders can further influence collective efficacy by raising the awareness in the team of individual member contributions and the value of self-sacrifice for the good of the team.

82   Factors determining performance

Cohesion

The ‘togetherness’ of a team has consistently been highlighted in team/group-focused literature across multiple domains as a crucial factor related to team performance. Albert Carron and colleagues (2005) suggested that cohesion is “a dynamic process that reflects the tendency of a group to stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its instrumental objectives and/or for the satisfaction of member affective needs” (p. 213). Two specific ‘types’ of cohesion are frequently discussed in the relevant psychology literature: task and social. Task cohesion is the degree to which a team or group are united in their pursuit of specific goals and objectives. Social cohesion by contrast relates to the degree to which a team is united in their social interactions and satisfaction in interpersonal interactions. Antecedents of social cohesion identified in the literature include the degree of social networks that exist in the team, and the pattern, strength, and number of interpersonal ties that exist between team members. There has been a consistently cited relationship between cohesion and performance across many studies in multiple performance domains. However, it is still unclear whether this relationship is cause or effect. Does greater cohesion lead to improved performance or does greater performance levels and success lead to enhanced perceptions of cohesion? The reality is probably a degree of both. There is also an interesting relationship that has been reported in the literature between cohesion and team mood. Research has suggested that higher levels of cohesion have been associated with higher vigour, lower depression, reduced anger, and reduced tension, all of which could indirectly influence performance.

Team emotion

While emotions and emotional responses can impact upon the performance of individuals, there is also the potential for ‘team’ emotion

Factors determining performance 

83

to impact upon team performance. This concept of team or group emotion was developed by psychology researchers Janice Kelly and Sigal Barsade (2001) in their review of mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Kelly and Barsade described group emotion as “the group’s affective [feeling] state that arises from the combination of its bottom-up – affective compositional effects [combination of individual emotions] and its top-down components – affective context [the group’s context]” (p. 100). This description highlights that group emotion emerges from the interaction between individual affect (emotion, mood, emotional intelligence) and the context of the team. Within the team the affective states experienced by individual performers are communicated to other group members that results in the development of a group-level construct. There is evidence that suggests that individuals are sensitive to the broader the emotional climate within a team, and as a result modify their own demonstrated mood accordingly (if everyone else is sad you become more sombre). This is all-important, as psychological research has highlighted links between emotion and key aspects of team functioning including decision-making, planning, the organization of ideas, persistence, problem-solving, and creativity. As a result, the development of an appropriate and facilitative emotional climate within the team is likely to enhance the probability of success. Linked to this concept is that Table 5.1  Key points to remember about mindset 1. Developing a growth mindset (you can improve through practice) is better in the long run. 2. Effort is the key to future success – so passion and dedication will determine what you achieve. 3. If you know your mindset when you perform well you can take steps to try and achieve that mindset on a more consistent basis. 4. You are what you eat – a healthy diet and good hydration are the best way to ensure you are mentally ‘sharp’. 5. Psychological skills can help performance (e.g., goal-setting, imagery, relaxation, etc.), and as skills the more you practice them the better they become.

84   Factors determining performance Table 5.2  Practical psychological strategies to enhance performance   1. Be an optimist – life always looks better when the glass is half full (yes, you can choose to be optimistic).   2. See the link between practice and performance, as a rule of thumb the more you put in the more you will get out.   3. Think about what you do when things go well, and try to replicate them.   4. A good night sleep can help you cope with a lot (so plan for sleep – especially when travelling).   5. Set goals – they give you a way to get from A (the start) to B (where you want to get to).   6. Develop your relaxation and mindfulness skills, great for performance and great for life.   7. Understand what you say to yourself (we all talk to ourselves) and make sure it is positive and supportive.   8. Develop a routine for pre-performance – it gives you something to think about and blocks any unwanted thoughts.   9. In teams, make sure everyone knows exactly what they should be doing, and check everyone else has the same understanding. 10. Be aware of how your emotions impact upon performance (both individual and team) and understand how to create your preferred response (excited rather than nervous).

of emotional contagion, a term coined to describe the transfer of experienced emotion from one individual to another. Research suggests that negative emotions can be ‘caught’ more easily than positive emotions. A number of factors have been cited as influencing the contagion process including: the degree to which the individual is a good ‘sender’ of emotion; the degree to which the individuals are good ‘receivers’ of emotion; and the degree to which good senders of emotion occupy important or central roles within the team.

SUMMARY Whether the focus is at an individual or a team level, there are a broad range of factors that both influence and determine performance. Individuals seeking to enhance performance outcomes should, as a result, adopt a two-step strategy. First, to develop the abilities of the individuals in question to apply the relevant psychological skills. Once the basic skills have been developed the second step should look to

Factors determining performance 

85

apply and test these key psychological skills in increasingly pressurized practice settings. This ‘testing in the heat of battle’ approach is the best way to see if skills have been sufficiently learnt, and if the individuals (and team) are able to apply these psychological skills effectively when required.

6 PRACTICING FOR PERFORMANCE

It is often said that practice makes perfect. That is not strictly true: practice makes permanent. As a result, what has been learnt and practiced forms the foundations for how individuals perform when it counts. While this probably seems straightforward and just common sense, many performers and their coaches/instructors do not appear to apply this principle in the practices they design. While most performers will practice their skills in training they often do not practice for performing these skills in anything like the real performance environment. Not preparing for the environment that performance is going to take place in, not looking to control emotions in the same way, not setting the same high standards that are required for successful performance can all have a negative impact upon success when it comes to performing under pressure. Practice should be all about preparing to perform. Evidence suggests that what you do in practice is likely to be transferred to the performance arena. As a result, allowing the development of poor habits when practicing can expose fatal flaws when it matters. This chapter will explore ways to maximize the impact of effective practice and how to prepare most effectively for the real performance pressures. The chapter will also consider how to maximize performance in team-focused performance domains by

88   Practicing for performance

considering the impact that the team environment can have upon team functioning, and ultimately upon team performance.

WHAT IS PREPARATION? Preparation (practice) is exactly that, preparing/practicing to perform. This specific focus is different from skill development. Good instructors, coaches, and performers will draw a distinct line between the two different types of practice. Skill development is a cognitive (thinking) process where the performer is learning to execute a new skill or new technique. This stage of learning is characterized by relatively high volumes of repetition where the performer and their coach/instructor are trying to programme the performer’s brain to execute the skill in a certain way. Due to the fact that this is a cognitive (thinking) process, where the performer is having to think about what they are doing, how it feels, and to understand the differences between good and poor skill execution, other demands on the performer should be minimized. In comparison, preparation (or practice to perform) should develop the performer’s ability to execute these same skills under pressure. The crucial thing to remember here, though, is that it is the execution of the skills bit that is important. If the skills have not been sufficiently learnt, trying to perform these skills under pressure becomes very difficult. In preparation, the aim is to test the performer’s skills (where possible) at the same intensity and accuracy levels as in a real performance environment. The things that are learnt in practice and preparation are the things that are required for successful performance in the real performance environment. This is because under pressure individuals revert back to their learnt habits (habitual responses). That is why making modifications to technique can be difficult, as the individual’s brain is always fighting against the technique(s) that have previously been learnt. To make sufficient changes to the technique of an individual performer there needs to be sufficient time to learn the new skill(s) (and re-programme the brain) before these new skills can really be effective in the real performance environment.

Practicing for performance 

89

Habits

The more an action or a skill is repeated in a certain way the more the action becomes ‘reinforced’ and as a result the brain develops a tendency to respond in that particular way to a stimulus. As this repetition continues the brain develops a stronger tendency to respond in a certain way (habit). This repetition further strengthens the association between the stimulus and the response, further reinforcing the formation of a habitual response. Habits are generally seen as a goal-directed type of automaticity, and habitual behaviours are instigated by triggering stimulus cues. The reason why understanding habits is so important is that they both underpin and determine our behaviour. Researchers in psychology have suggested that deliberate intention (what you would like to do) may become irrelevant in guiding a response when behaviours have been repeatedly performed in the past and have become habitual. This relationship is suggested to be particularly strong under conditions of pressure. The ability to think through different courses of action is further reduced and because of this the performer becomes even more likely to respond in a habitual way. As a result, it is important to ensure that performers develop the right habits to help them to perform effectively under pressure. Habitual responses, once developed, can be very difficult to change. The reason for this is that habits are formed through significant repetition. This repetition underpins the whole process of learning, and the more an action is repeated the stronger the resulting association between the stimulus and that specific response becomes.

Habit formation

Simply put, habits are developed through repetition (practice); in essence they are part of the process of learning. The more you practice the more permanent or habitual a specific way of acting (behaviour) becomes. What is learnt and practiced in preparatory activities forms the foundations for how individuals perform in the real environment.

90   Practicing for performance

Any good or bad habits that are developed in practice will more than likely be transferred at some point into the real performance domain. When performing any action (such as a skill) the individual learns about the favourable and unfavourable consequences of the action. If the action resulted in a positive outcome the individual performer is more likely to repeat it. Therefore, decisions are strongly influenced by previous experiences, a process that ultimately underpins habit formation. Habit strength increases as a result of repetitions of positive reinforcements (achievement) – which is why a performer who is successful early on in their career may develop bad habits that will limit performance in the future. This will ultimately reduce the likelihood that they will realize their potential in the future. It is also one argument for having the most skilled and competent educators and trainers working with novice performers – in order to develop the right habits early. When it comes to performing under pressure the habits that have been developed are then triggered when the right conditions are present. Unlearning bad habits

When considering the question “how do I change bad habits?” the most effective answer is to not develop them in the first place. This might seem an unhelpful response but in this case prevention really is more effective than cure. The reason for this is that habits are formed through significant repetition. This repetition underpins the whole process of learning, and the more that something is repeated the more ingrained it becomes, and the more ‘fixed’ the brain becomes. In order to ‘un-learn’ bad habits the individual would need to deliberately practice the ‘good habit’ that they are looking to ‘overwrite’ with to a similar extent. Also, to be most effective the performer would also need to refrain from performing in the ‘real’ performance environment for a while. This is because under pressure there is a tendency to revert back to pre-learnt skills. So, if the new habits have not become sufficiently ingrained there is a strong likelihood that the individual performer would revert back to their bad habits, which

Practicing for performance 

91

in turn serves to further reinforce those habits, which further sets back the development of the new ‘correct’ habits. There will also be a period of inconsistent performance as this transition takes place. So, if an individual was looking to change or correct bad habits they would also have to be prepared for and accept a fall in performance (which is hard for most performers to accept). There is also no guarantee that performance levels would return to what they were previously. How soon in the skill-learning process you look to change bad habits is also a factor. The younger/earlier that this is attempted the greater the potential for success. The older/more experienced the performer the harder the change/transition becomes. As a result, it really is a case of prevention being better than cure. Getting things right from the start is definitely the way to go.

THE PREPARATION-PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP? The crucial thing to remember about practice is that in terms of the brain and the motor system the body is practicing the cognition and behaviours that will be used for performance. Our lives are all about learning, all of the time. Often people only think about the learning sessions that we designate as ‘learning’, such as attending a lesson/coaching session, or going to school/university. But as far as the brain is concerned there is no differentiation between ‘switching on’ and ‘switching off’ learning. The brain simply responds to repetition whenever and however it occurs. This is important as it highlights the fact that it is very difficult to behave in one way in practice and expect to act and perform differently in the performance environment. When it comes to effective preparation and practice for performance the most committed individuals will prepare with intensity, and also be very specific in what they are trying to achieve. There is also sometimes an attempt to make their preparation more challenging than the real performance environment, with performers pushing themselves to have greater control and greater accuracy. In this way they can make the execution of skills for the actual performances feel easier than in practice.

92   Practicing for performance

It takes a lot of time and effort to become an expert in executing a skill. This expertise is characterized by near flawless execution time after time. It also takes a lot of time and effort to learn how to execute these skills in real situations and under pressure. This can’t be achieved just by repetition, so performers need to make sure that they use their preparation to reinforce the execution of the skills under the right conditions and challenges. Once the skills have been learnt, the next step is learning how to apply them under pressure. There is another important consideration here. This relates to the focus of practice at a specific moment in time. If the aim were to develop technique and to form habits then ideally this would take place when the performer is relatively fresh (not too fatigued). Fatigue reduces the ability to think and perform, and also reduces the ability to concentrate and to shut out distractions. Good quality practice for skill development and the enhancement of technique should not be overly long, with plenty of breaks and opportunity to recover to maintain a relatively high level of performance. This however changes if the focus of practice switches to practicing to performing. The assumption now is that the motor skills are as well learnt as they need to be, and the focus is on being able to execute these skills in more realistic environments and scenarios. One factor that is present during performance in most domains is increasing fatigue. One way to make training harder than the real thing is to introduce an aspect of physical exhaustion (e.g., on a treadmill or cycling) before trying to execute the required skills. ‘Forcing’ the brain and body to perform in this way can help to build ‘resilience’ for when the real environment is tough and draining. Strategies to prepare better for successful performance

The ability to develop effective strategies depends, at least in part, on developing a good understanding of the challenges that exist in the real performance environment. If these challenges are well understood scenarios, challenges can be developed that, as accurately as possible, replicate the real performance environment and the existing

Practicing for performance 

93

constraints/influencing factors. The focus of the strategies adopted, though, depends on whether the performer is learning the skill or preparing to perform. If they are learning the skill then repetition is required to get better at the skill. When preparing to perform the focus needs to be on replicating the demands of performance as much as possible. Often, it is left to the individual performer to really make the practice scenario as realistic as possible. Anything that is designed outside of the real performance environment is never exactly the same. As such it is the responsibility of the performer to create the real scenario in their head, pushing the performance and intensity levels required. Anyone can perform flawlessly when the pressure is off, but can they do it when it counts? The best performers in preparation mode will have a specific scenario in their head and will have a clear idea of what the required outcome is. Then, after every practice they will evaluate their performance against this target, with only the best being acceptable. In that way they learn to execute the skill, and also how to execute the skill in the right situation with the appropriate control. So as mentioned at the start of this chapter, understanding the challenges of the real performance environment can ensure that an individual prepares in a way that increases their ability to execute the required skills when it matters under pressure. So what are these factors? Well, the closer that practice is designed to represent the real performance environment the better. Practicing on a stage running a full ‘dress rehearsal’ in front of a crowd is the ultimate practice. Now recognizing that setting up these practice scenarios is extremely difficult, and as a result probably very unlikely, there needs to be consideration of how close you can get to these ‘gold standard’ scenarios. For example, research in the sport of cricket has shown that by not having someone standing where the umpire stands fundamentally changes the approach run-up of the bowler. So, without the umpire the bowler is learning something that is different from how they play the game. If you give a dramatic or musical performer more or less space than they will have to perform they can develop a routine that is not tailored to what they will need to do. This in turn will make

94   Practicing for performance

them think more about the performance, which in turn increases the likelihood that something will go wrong. So, returning back to the previous main point, practice needs to replicate the conditions of performance to achieve the best results. Preparing better is, at least in part, dependent on developing a good understanding of the challenges that exist in the performance environment. If you understand these challenges you can set up scenarios and challenges that, as accurately as possible, replicate the real thing. So, as mentioned at the start of this chapter, understanding the challenges of the real performance environment can ensure that individuals prepare in a way that is increasing their ability to execute their learnt skills when it matters under pressure. Another significant aspect of the ‘real’ performance environment is the actual preparatory performance environment that is selected. The closer you can get to the real performance environment the better. So, practicing in a similar physical environment is a good starting point. Another important aspect of scenario work is to try and create, as much as possible, similar or more intense environmental conditions. What environmental conditions are going to be faced in performance? Is it going to be hot or cold, indoors or outdoors, etc.? How can these conditions be best prepared for? Also, another important aspect of preparation previously mentioned is the use of scenario work. An important factor in setting the scenario in the head is the ability to ‘imagine’ the situation. Some performers are very good at constructing an image (relating to the scenario) even with their eyes open. They can visualize the physical space, the audience, and other performers, as well as possible environmental factors such as the weather and light. One way to get around the very internal nature of this experience is to get performers to verbalize (say out loud) the scenario, letting others (e.g., coaches) know the scenario, and what success would be in that situation. This achieves two main goals: first, to commit the performer to the scenario (once we verbalize something it becomes more real); second, so others can objectively evaluate the performance of the individual

Practicing for performance 

95

based on the scenario. This way the performer is not able to allow themselves to ‘get away’ with it in practice. Links between preparation and performance

As covered previously in this book, to maximize the transfer of learning from practice to performance the preparatory environment needs to reflect (as much as possible) the performance environment. Psychologist Egon Brunswik (1956) coined the term ‘representative design’ to refer to the degree to which practice replicated the demands experienced in the performance setting. In particular, Brunswick highlighted the importance of the visual cues that exist in the performance domain, and the need to have the same visual cues present in the practice domain. For performers, instructors, mentors, and support staff focused on achieving high levels of performance, representative design equates to the design of practice and preparation environments. When considering the links between preparation and performance and how ‘equivalent’ the two are, a number of factors can be used to explore the similarities between the two environments. One particular example for how this idea can be implemented comes from the sport of cricket. A small-sided games approach to cricket training has been developed and termed ‘Battlezone’ (Renshaw, Chappell, Fitzgerald, Davison, and McFadyen, 2010). Renshaw and colleagues proposed that Battlezone allows players to acquire cricket-specific skills in an intensive match-simulation environment. Such a training environment may facilitate a greater transference of learnt skills into match play. The team performance environment

Building a positive and supportive team performance environment is crucial to the successful development and performance of most teams, across many performance domains, and in particular those

96   Practicing for performance

teams that are successful over a longer period of time. The perceptions of the individual performers within a team environment have been shown to have an important impact on a range of individual outcomes including both performance and satisfaction. Indeed psychologists Christopher Parker, Boris Baltes, Scott Young, and colleagues (2003) in a meta-analysis of the psychological climate literature highlighted clear relationships between individual perceptions and the following individual factors: attitudes, well-being, motivation, and performance. These individual perceptions then grow to form a psychological climate held by the individual performer that then underpins subsequent perceptions of the performance environment, and associated behaviours. It has further been suggested that these individual psychological climates can merge to become a higher-level group perception of the performance environment that then serves to both underpin and impact upon the actions and outputs of the team as a whole. Developing positive performance climates

Occupational psychologists Matis Schulte, Cheri Ostroff, and Angelo Kinicki (2006) suggested that an important starting point for developing positive psychological climates was to first focus on the factors that impact upon psychological climate: organization, processes, and communication. Second, to focus on the factors highlighted as influencing perceptions of psychological climate: role stress and a lack of harmony; job challenge and autonomy; leadership support and facilitation; and performance group cooperation, friendliness, and warmth.

PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTS The extent of the performance environment was conceptualized by Matt Pain and Chris Harwood (2008), sport psychology researchers from Loughborough University, as those influencing factors that are temporally and organizationally related to competition. This

Practicing for performance 

97

conceptualization provides a rich and holistic approach to understanding the performance environment, as it encompasses any factors exerting influence on the performer(s) originating from any source at any point in time within the environment. These environmental influencing factors, whether they are psychologically positive or negative, have been highlighted within the broader psychology literature as having an impact upon performance. As a result, the performance environment can be viewed as a holistic term that encompasses multiple influences from the organizational structures to the closeness of the colleagues and managers, as long as they have an effect upon athlete performance. Therefore, any factors that can exert an influence on the performer(s) can be defined as being part of the performance environment. In sport, Pain and Harwood (2008) sought to better understand the holistic performance environment that existed in youth soccer. Their research highlighted eight dimensions that described the performance environment: social factors; physical factors; psychological factors; tactical factors; planning and organization; development and performance philosophy; physical environment; and coaching. Social factors related to the degree of cohesion that exists and the nature of performer down time (what they do). Physical factors included how physically prepared the performers were, fatigue levels, and the use of recovery/regeneration strategies. Psychological factors included motivation, anxiety and relaxation, use of goal-setting, response to adversity, and confidence. Tactical factors included the degree of tactical preparation and tactical flexibility. Planning and organization related to how the environment was organized, what the strategic objectives were, and how individuals were managed. Development and performance philosophy focused on how individuals were developed, the experience of individual performers, and the psychological climate of the team. The physical environment considered factors such as the performing environment, the training environment, accommodation and travel. Finally, coaching considered the approaches adopted for teaching and learning, the provision of feedback, reflection, and the performer-instructor relationships. In a follow-up study Pain and

98   Practicing for performance

Harwood highlighted the presence of a positive team leader, strong group cohesion, good group communication, and strong performerinstructor relationships as being crucial for developing effective performance environments. Graham Jones and colleagues (2009), then of management consultancy firm Lane4, developed a model that sought to outline the key features of high performance across a diverse range of performance domains. This model was developed based upon an extensive review of published literature in business, military, and sporting domains. The model itself is composed of three factors influencing performance: leadership, performance enablers, and people. The model also outlines four factors that determine the team/organizational climate and ultimately performance: innovation; well-being; achievement; and internal processes. Jones and colleagues highlighted that the role of the leader in this context is to foster and develop the conditions in which the team and its individual members can perform to their potential. In the model, performance enablers include vision, support, and challenge. This category is further divided into subcategories including information, instruments, and incentives. The people factor in the model (as the name suggests) focuses on the characteristics of the individual team members, and in particular the attitudes, behaviours and capacities. The organizational climate element of the model focuses on four specific factors: achievement, well-being, innovation, and internal processes. Achievement has an emphasis on productivity and goal achievement. Well-being is orientated towards developing people within the organization. Innovation emphasizes creativity, and internal processes focuses on the internal structures and processes that support the environment.

Factors influencing the performance environment Personnel

The reality of many performance environments is that the individuals involved (both supporters and managers/facilitators) have a relatively

Practicing for performance 

99

short involvement. This fact often results in a tension between planning for the present and planning for the future. Often there are pressures to achieve shorter-term targets at the expense of potential greater achievement in the future. The challenge for organizations in performance domains is to achieve a degree of consistency and continuity in the development and implementation of the performance environment. This can be achieved through the careful selection of the ‘right’ individuals for the environment at the right time as a way to reduce periods of significant change due to personnel changes. Conflict

In any group settings there is an inevitability that at some point there will be conflict between individuals or groups. As such, a key factor influencing the success of any performance environment is how well it can manage and resolve conflict when it occurs. It is important to also acknowledge that conflict, as long as it is managed well, can be a very positive and facilitative state. The aims of conflict management processes are to limit the potentially destructive aspects of conflict while maximizing the positive effects. Cotterill (2012), in his book on team psychology, outlined five conflict resolution techniques that might be adopted: collaborating; competing; accommodating; avoiding; and compromising. Collaborating suggests parties should state their views, listen to the other party’s views, and then negotiate a solution that incorporates the views of both parties. Competing suggests both parties have differing views regarding the situation and the required solution. In these circumstances one party is trying to convince the other party to adopt their solution. Accommodating hypothesizes that while the parties have differing views there might be a strategic reason why they might view the alternative solution as advantageous. Avoiding, as the name suggests, is characterized by parties trying to ignore the issues underpinning the conflict. Compromising suggests that while the two parties have different viewpoints they are willing to make concessions in order to resolve the issue.

100   Practicing for performance

THE IMPORTANCE OF PERCEPTION IN DETERMINING THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE While there are a diverse range of factors that contribute to the global construct of the performance environment, the degree to which these factors influence each individual is determined by the way each individual appraises their actual or perceived impact. The process of appraising this perceived impact, referred to as the appraisal process, is the link between a situation and the individual’s responses to it, with emotions being the adaptive responses (Ellsworth and Scherer, 2003). Building upon this point, psychologist Richard Lazarus (2006) suggested that responses do not specifically reside within the individual performer or the performance environment but the relationship between the two. Lazarus further suggested a model to explain how emotions are manifest following the appraisal process. The model suggests three different levels of evaluation: relational, motivational, and cognitive. The outcome of these evaluations then determines the emotions experienced by the individual. The first appraisal determines whether the situation is positive, dangerous, or irrelevant. A positive appraisal at this point results in positive emotions, and irrelevant cues will require little cognitive attention, in that they are not deemed to be important. If this first appraisal results in a dangerous interpretation the cues will be perceived to cause challenge, threat, harm, or loss. The secondary appraisal stage is an assessment of the resources available to the individual to deal with this potentially threatening situation. If the individual perceives that they do not have the ability to cope with the specific situation and the associated challenges, they might experience a negative emotional response such as anxiety, stress, or fear. If the individual deems they have sufficient resources to match the demands that the circumstance requires the situation will be viewed as a challenge and as a result could have a motivating effect. If this situation appraised as being threatening persists, and there are insufficient resources to meet the associated demands, then negative emotions will continue to be generated. In

Practicing for performance 

101

this case the individual’s performance will either suffer, or they will need to develop or implement a new coping strategy. Sport psychologists Rich Neil, Sheldon Hanton, Stephen Mellalieu, and Dave Fletcher (2011) conducted research that sought to assess the role of further appraisals and reported that stressors of higher emotional intensity were debilitative for performance, whereas stressors lower in emotional intensity where facilitative for performance. Neil and colleagues also reported that stress from performance sources caused greater anxiety and uncertainty whereas organizational stressors caused more anger towards demands. A finding that further highlights the complex relationship between the individual and the performance environment, Pain and Harwood (2008) reported that the intensity of the emotional response experienced appeared to differ between individuals. In their study of soccer players almost half of the participants reported a lack of sleep as being a negative source. But, the reported magnitude of this negative affect was fairly low, and so its effect upon performance could also be minimal. Team cohesion was found to have a very strong positive magnitude and as a result the social element of the team may be a very important factor for success. If the individual has insufficient coping resources to meet the demands of the situation following the secondary appraisal, appropriate coping strategies may be utilized. Coping strategies found within the performance environment include reappraising and general cognitive strategies, using social support, blocking out unwanted stimuli, and reflection. An understanding of these coping strategies and the impact they can have is important because once the psychological influencing factors from the environment have been identified, individuals need to understand how to turn negative emotional responses into positive ones that enhance performance outcomes. Psychologists Joanne Thatcher and Melissa Day (2008) have further suggested that the underlying properties (novelty, predictability, event uncertainty, imminence, duration, temporal uncertainty, ambiguity, and timing in relation to life cycle) of the stress source in the performance environment may be more important to focus upon rather than the source of stress itself.

102   Practicing for performance Table 6.1  Key points to remember about preparation 1. Practice (getting better at skills) is not the same as preparation (learning to apply those skills in the real environment). 2. Under pressure you revert to your learnt habits – make sure you develop the right ones. 3. Unlearning bad habits is often difficult to achieve. 4. The closer preparation is to the real performance environment the better the transfer of performance. 5. In teams the emotions of one person can impact upon the feeling of the whole team.

Table 6.2  Practical strategies to enhance preparation for performance   1. Practice as you want to perform – so give 100%.   2. The closer the practice environment is to the ‘real thing’ the better the transfer.   3. Make sure you understand the difference between practice and preparation.   4. Performance is tiring – so make sure you also practice when tired.   5. Form the right performance habits (that is what you revert to under pressure).   6. Make it as real as you can (in your head) – don’t accept silly mistakes.   7. Teams need to practice the ‘full’ performance, not just shorter/smallest adaptations.   8. Variations on the real environment are ok, as long as they replicate the performance conditions (e.g., intensity, duration, skills required, etc.).   9. Factor in preparation for performance between normal practice and the real performance. 10. Evaluate then repeat (making changes if required).

SUMMARY It is crucial to understand the constraints that exist within the performance environment if practice is to be designed to maximize transfer from preparation to performance. The closer these constraints can be replicated the greater the potential for positive transfer to take place. In order to do this effectively it is also important to understand the nature of the performance environment, and the factors they exist in, and ultimately determine what the performance environment is. Building upon this knowledge it is also crucial to appreciate how

Practicing for performance 

103

individuals respond to these factors, the appraisals that take place, and the strategies that can be adopted to mediate their influence. Finally, this comprehensive understanding of the full range of factors that constrain performance can be used to design preparation activities that best replicate the real performance environment.

FURTHER READING

For anyone who is looking to further develop their understanding of the psychology of performance these suggested texts offer a logical next step: Performance Psychology: A Practitioner’s Guide. Edited by Dave Collins, Angela Button, and Hugh Richards (2011) (Published by Churchill Livingstone, London, UK) This was one of the first texts that really focused exclusively on performance psychology. While it is empirically underpinned and referenced the book is very readable with a range of good practical examples. The book is broadly organized into four core sections: (1) Preparation: considering how to select and develop the most talented performers; (2) Provision: exploring how to support talented performers; (3) Practice: considering how you design practice to enhance performance; (4) Performance: exploring factors that impact upon the individual’s ability to perform when it counts. Performance Psychology: Theory and Practice by Stewart Cotterill (2017) (Published by Routledge, Abingdon, UK) This book is a logical next step for readers who have enjoyed this brief introduction. This book explores the key concepts raised in the current book, but explores them in greater detail, considering the key research and theoretical underpinning. The book explores decision-making, emotion, resilience and mental toughness, cognition and perception, ageing and experience, confidence, motor skills, nutrition, and recovery. The book also considers core theoretical concepts while also offering practical guidance on how performance can be improved.

106   Further reading Mindset: The New Psychology of Success (How We Can Fulfil Our Potential) by Carol S. Dweck (2006) (Published by Ballantine Books, New York, USA) A very good book that is easily accessible. While based upon significant research the book itself is written for a broader readership. The text provides an overview of fixed and growth mindsets, and, crucially, how to go about teaching and enhancing mindset for success across a broad range of domains including: sport, business, relationships, and education (school). The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance. Edited by Anders Ericsson, Neil Charness, Paul Feltovich, and Robert Hoffman (2006) (Published by Cambridge University Press, New York, USA) If you want to better understand expertise and expert performance this is a definitive guide. Weighing in at 900 pages and with 42 separate chapters it is quite large, but as a result you will find anything you want to know about the topic. Of particular interest in this book are the chapters that focus on expertise in specific performance domains including: medicine and surgery; transportation; software design; professional writing; decision-making; music; sport; the performing arts (acting, ballet, and contemporary dance); and gaming. Human Performance: Cognition, Stress and Individual Differences by Gerald Matthews, Roy Davies, Stephen Westerman, and Rob Stammers (2000) (Published by Psychology Press, Hove, UK) This book is a bit older, but offers a great overview of a range of psychological factors linked to human performance. The book was particularly influential for me back when I was a doctoral student at the University of Edinburgh. The book considers key psychological factors that underpin human performance including: cognitive architecture; selective attention; divided attention and workload; skilled performance; human error; stress and fatigue; lifestyle choices; individual differences; and ageing. Performance Psychology: Perception, Action, Cognition, and Emotion. Edited by Markus Raab, Babett Lobinger, Sven Hoffmann, Alexandra Pizzera, and Sylvain Laborde (2015) (Published by Elsevier Science Publishing) If you are looking for a challenging read then this is the next book. The book adopts a very cognitive-science perspective on performance and considers research and theoretical models in-depth. The book explores core underpinning

Further reading 

107

theoretical models and empirical evidence before then exploring a range of different performance domains including music, the performing arts, and sport. Bounce:The Myth of Talent and the Power of Practice by Matthew Syed (2011) (Published by Forth Estate publishing, UK) A very popular book, that is well written and contains lots of examples to illustrate the key points made throughout the book. The book presents the view that performance is the result of thousands of hours of purposeful practice, and not innate talent. Building upon this point the book suggests that expertise is developed from experience, so this should be the focus of developmental activity. Musical Excellence: Strategies and Techniques to Enhance Performance by Aaron Williamon (2004) (Published by Oxford University Press) This text is a little dated now but still offers a great read with some really useful information. It is not a book in the traditional sense, rather a series of separate papers pulled together into one text. The contents reviews relevant research and also explores strategies that musicians and their instructors/coaches alike can seek to implement.

REFERENCES

Abraham, A., & Collins, D. (2011). Taking the next step: Ways forward for coaching science. Quest, 63, 366–384. Anglone, B., Hass, R. W., & Cohen, M. (2016). Skill transfer in visual arts expertise. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(2), 147–156. Araújo, D., Davids, K., & Hristovsk, R. (2006). The ecological dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 653–676. Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy:The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Barlow, D. H. (2000). Unravelling the mysteries on anxiety and its disorders from the perspective of emotion theory. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1247–1263. Beaumont, C., Maynard, I. W., & Butt, J. (2015). Effective ways to develop and maintain Robust sport-confidence: Strategies advocated by sport psychology consultants. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 27, 301–318. Bechara, A., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (2000). Characterization of the decisionmaking deficit of patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions. Brain, 123, 2189–2202. Bernstein, N. (1967). The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments (Second ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 195–202.

110  References Carron, A. V., Hausenblas, H. A., & Eys, M. A. (2005). Group dynamics in sport. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology. Christensen, W., Sutton, J., & Mcilwain, D. J. F. (2016). Cognition in skilled action: Meshed control and the varieties of skill experience. Mind and Language, 31, 37–66. Collins, D., Button, A., & Richards, H. (2011). Performance psychology: A practitioner’s guide. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Collins, C. G., & Parker, S. K. (2010). Team capability beliefs over time: Distinguishing between team potency, team outcome efficacy, and team process efficacy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 1003–1023. Cotterill, S. T. (2011). Experiences of developing pre-performance routines with elite cricket players. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 2, 81–91. Cotterill, S. T. (2012). Team psychology in sport: theory and practice. Abingdon: Routledge. Cotterill, S. T. (2015). Preparing for performance: Strategies adopted across performance domains. The Sport Psychologist, 29, 158–170. Cotterill, S. T. (2017). Performance psychology: Theory and Practice. Hove: Psychology Press. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Putnam. Dane, E., & Pratt, G. (2007). Exploring intuition and its role in managerial decisionmaking. Academy of Management Review, 32, 33–54. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press. Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. Handbook of Affective Sciences, 572–595. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406. Feltz, D. L. (1988). Self-confidence and sports performance. Exercise and Sport Science Review, 16, 423–458. Filho, E., Aubertin, P., & Petiot, B. (2016). The making of expert performers at Cirque du Soleil and the National Circus School: A performance enhancement outlook. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 7(2), 68–79. Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.

References 

111

Fransen, K., Vanbeselaere, N., Exadaktylos, V., Vande Broek, G., De Cuyper, B., Berckmans, D., Ceux, T., De Backer, M., & Boen, F. (2012). “Yes, we can!”: Perceptions of collective efficacy sources in volleyball. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(7), 641–649. Gentile, A. M. (1972). A working model of skill acquisition with applications to teaching. Quest, 17, 3–23. Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers:The story of success. New York: Little, Brown, and Co. Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2007). The role of domain-specific practice, handedness, and starting age in chess. Developmental Psychology, 43, 159–172. Hardy, J., Oliver, E., & Tod, D. (2009). A framework for the study and application of self-talk within sport. In S. D. Mellalieu & S. Hanton (Eds.), Advances in applied sport psychology: A review (pp. 37–74). London: Routledge. Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1979). Automatic and effortful processes in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 356–388. Hays, K. F. (2012). The psychology of performance in sport and other domains. In S. Murphy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sport and performance psychology (pp. 24–45). New York: Oxford University Press. Hodges, N. J., & Baker, J. (2011). Expertise: The goal of performance development. In D. Collins, A. Button, & H. Richards (Eds.), Performance psychology: A practitioner’s guide. London: Churchill Livingstone. Jackson, S., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Flow in sports: The keys to optimal experiences and performances. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Jones, G., Gittins, M., & Hardy, L. (2009). Creating an environment where high performance is inevitable and sustainable: The high performance environment model. Annual Review of High Performance Consulting, 139–148. Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 144–156. Kelly, J. R., & Barsade, S. G. (2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(1), 99–130. Kenny, D. T. (2005). A systematic review of treatments for music performance anxiety. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 18(3), 183–208. Kerr, R. (1982). Perceptual motor learning. Philadelphia: Saunders College Publications. Kibele, A. (2006). Non-consciously controlled decision-making for fast motor reactions in sports: A priming approach for motor responses to

112  References non-consciously perceived movement features. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 591–610. Kozbelt, S. A. (2001). Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition, 8, 705–723. Kozub, S. A., & McDonnell, J. F. (2000). Exploring the relationship between cohesion and collective efficacy in rugby teams. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23, 120–129. Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press. Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000). The construct of mindfulness. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 1–9. Larsen, C. H., Alfermann, D., Henriksen, K., & Christensen, M. K. (2013). Successful talent development in soccer: The characteristics of the Environment. Sport, Exercise and Performance Psychology, 2(3), 190–206. Lazarus, R. S. (2006). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lerner, J. S., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(2), 115–137. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–528. Malouff, J. M., & Schutte, N. S. (2016). Can psychological interventions increase optimism? A meta-analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11, 1–11. Martha, C., Sanchez, X., & Gomà-i-Freixanet, M. (2009). Risk perception as a function of risk exposure amongst rock climbers. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 193–200. Masters, R. S. W. (1992). Knowledge, Knerves and know-how: The role of explicit versus implicit knowledge in the breakdown of a complex motor skill under pressure. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 343–358. Matthews, G., Davies, D. R., Westerman, S. J., & Stammers, R. B. (2000). Human performance: Cognition, stress and individual differences. Hove: Psychology Press. McPherson, S. L., & Kernodle, M. W. (2003). Tactics the neglected attribute of expertise. In J. L. Starkes & K. A. Ericsson (Eds.), Expert performance in sports (pp. 137–168). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Moen, B., & Rundmo, T. (2005). Predictors of unrealistic optimism: A study of Norwegian risk takers. Journal of Risk Research, 8, 363–382.

References 

113

Moran, A. P. (1996). The psychology of concentration in sports performers: A cognitive analysis. Hove: Psychology Press. Morris, T., Spittle, M., & Watt, A. P. (2005). Imagery in sport. Leeds, England: Human Kinetics. Neil, R., Hanton, S., Mellalieu, S. D., & Fletcher, D. (2011). Competition stress and emotions in sport performers: The role of further appraisals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(4), 460–470. Pain, M. A., & Harwood, C. G. (2008). The performance environment of the England youth soccer teams: A quantitative investigation. Journal of Sport Science, 26(11), 1157–1169. Parker, C. P., Baltes, B. B., Young, S. A., Huff, J. W., Altmann, R. A., LaCost, H. A., & Roberts, J. E. (2003). Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta analysis review. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 24, 389–416. Perry, P. (2011). Concept analysis: Confidence/self-confidence. Azusa, CA: Blackwell Publishing. Phillips, W. J., Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D. G., & Hine, D. W. (2016). Thinking styles and decision making: A meta analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(3), 260–290. Raab, M. (2007). Think SMART, not hard-a review of teaching decision making in sport from an ecological rationality perspective. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 12(1), 1–22. Raab, M., & Laborde, S. (2011). When to blink and when to think. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 82(1), 89–98. Raab, M., Lobinger, B., Hoffmann, S., Pizzera, A., & Laborde, S. (2016). Performance psychology: Perception, action, cognition, and emotion. London: Academic Press. Renshaw, I., Chappell, G., Fitzgerald, D., Davison, J., & McFadyen, B. (2010). The Battle Zone: Constraint-led coaching in action. In M. Portus (Ed.), Conference of science, medicine and coaching in cricket (pp. 181–184). Sheraton Mirage, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, June 1–3. Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2011). Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model. Developmental Review, 31(2), 180–206. Schulte, M., Ostroff, C., & Kinicki, A. J. (2006). Organizational climate systems and psychological climate perceptions: A cross-level study of climate-satisfaction relationships. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 645–671.

114  References Short, S., & Ross-Stewart, L. (2009). A review of self-efficacy based interventions. In S. D. Mellalieu & S. Hanton (Eds.), Advances in applied sport psychology. Abingdon: Routledge. Syed, M. (2010). Bounce: Mozart, Federer, Picasso, Beckham, and the science of success. New York: HarperCollins. Thatcher, J., & Day, M. C. (2008). Re-appraising stress appraisals: The underlying properties of stress in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9(3), 318–335. Thomas, J. R., French, K. E., & Humphries, C. A. (1986). Knowledge development and sport skill performance: Directions for motor behaviour research. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 259–272. Thomas, O., Lane, A., & Kingston, K. (2011). Defining and contextualizing robust sport-confidence. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 23, 189–208. Weber, E. (2006). Constructing preferences from memory. New York: Cambridge University Press. Westen, D., & Blagov, P. S. (2007). A clinical-empirical model of emotion regulation: From defense and motivated reasoning to emotional constraint satisfaction In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 373–392). New York: Guilford Press. Wihelmsson, A., Dekker, S., & Hummerdal, D. (2013). Learning from failure. In J. D. Lee & A. Kirlik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive engineering. New York: Oxford University Press.