Description
Choking under pressure describes suboptimal sport performance in stressful situations, which has led to two fundamental ‘choking’ models: distraction and self-focus (Hill, Hanton, Matthews, & Fleming, 2010; Mesagno, Geukes, & Larkin, 2015). Based on these models, researchers have developed and tested a number of interventions to alleviate choking with varying success. Recently, we systematically reviewed existing choking interventions (Gröpel & Mesagno, 2017), but we did not include an effect-size analysis of those interventions. Therefore, in this presentation, we go a step further and analyze the effectiveness of the reviewed interventions. The review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, & Altman, 2009). The inclusion criteria were: (a) tested a motor skill in sport; (b) contained a high-pressure condition; (c) employed an intervention to prevent choking, (d) compared how performance changed from before to after an intervention (i.e. pretest–posttest design), and (e) included experienced athletes. Studies with trained novices were only included when the intervention study design required a sample with no initial knowledge of the skill tested such as when investigating analogy learning. A total of 47 intervention studies were included in the final analysis. These studies encompassed 13 interventions that were either distraction based or self-focus based. In addition, a third group – acclimatization interventions – was identified, which goal was to familiarize participants with pressure (e.g., practice under mild anxiety conditions). To analyze effectiveness of those interventions, we used statistical significance of effects as the criterion for a positive effect and, where reported or computable, partial eta squared as the measure of effect size (Cohen, 1988). Of the included studies, 34 studies (72%) reported positive effects with an average effect size of .22, which indicates that, in general, choking interventions based on both choking models and on acclimatization provide a benefit to performance under pressure. The most effective interventions were pre-performance routines (partial eta squared = .23), quiet eye training (.19), left-hand contractions (.26), anxiety training (.18), and the use of dual task (.29). Mixed evidence was found for analogy learning, and null effects were reported for goal setting, neurofeedback training, and reappraisal cues. These results may help athletes, coaches, and sport psychologists select and implement effective strategies and methods to improve performance under pressure.| Period | 12 May 2018 |
|---|---|
| Event title | 50. Jahrestagung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Sportpsychologie (asp): Die Psychophysiologie der Handlung |
| Event type | Conference |
| Location | Köln, Germany, North Rhine-WestphaliaShow on map |