Arousal: find the perfect balance, part one

Learning how to control arousal level directly impacts sports performance.

Photography credit Johann Walter Bantz

Arousal is the level of activity and alertness you feel in relation to a task, performance or situation.

Let’s first explore different theories of arousal in sport. In a follow up article we will present you with some strategies to manage arousal level.

Drive Theory

The Drive Theory describes a positive linear relationship between anxiety and performance. In other words, it suggest that higher anxiety levels lead to better performance.

Drive theory was outlined by Hull (1943) and then later modified by Spence (1956) - it is sometimes referred to as the Hull-Spence theory of behavior.

In brief, for well-learned tasks, there is a positive linear relationship between arousal and performance: the higher the arousal, the better the performance.

As seen in a previous article, Zajonc (1965) adopted drive theory to explain Social Facilitation.

However, the problem with Drive Theory is that it is difficult not only to know when a task becomes so well learned that arousal always have a positive influence on performance but also how to determine a hierarchy of habits.

The Inverted U Hypothesis

This theory explains how performance is best at a moderate level of arousal. If the arousal is too low or too high, it will result in a gradual decline of performance. Therefore, contrary to the Drive Theory, the Inverted U Hypothesis says there is an optimal arousal level that needs to be found by the athlete - it is not linear.

The Yerkes-Dodson law (1908) originated on experiments with mice learning to choose between white and black boxes using electric shocks.

The Inverted U Hypothesis, also called the Yerkes-Dodson law, presents two problems. First, the U shape is not a realistic representation of how a competitive sport situation really evolves. Secondly, this hypothesis may be too simplistic because the nature of arousal is multi-dimensional.

Here are some contemporary approaches to arousal and sport.

Multidimensional Anxiety Theory (MAT)

One of the most influential theories in sport research is the multidimensional theory of competitive state anxiety (MAT; Martens, Burton, Vealey, Bump, & Smith, 1990).

MAT theory suggests that an increase in cognitive anxiety will have a negative impact on performance. An increase in somatic anxiety will display a similar performance curve to the Inverted U Hypothesis, where performance increases up until a certain point, before gradually decreasing after a peak.

Cognitive anxiety refers to the thoughts, emotions, and mental impairments resulting from stress, for instance “fear of failure and negative expectations about performance”.

The term “somatic” means relating to the physical body; somatic anxiety is a physical manifestation such as muscle ache, sweating or shortness of breath.

This multi-dimensional approach shows that an individual can be high in cognitive anxiety and low in somatic, or vice versa, or both low/low or high/high.

The Catastrophe Theory

The Catastrophe Theory says performance improves as arousal levels increase, but only up to a point of optimal arousal. If arousal keeps on increasing beyond this optimal level, there is a sharp, catastrophic drop in performance. The theory also suggests that even if an athlete get back to feeling calm again, he/she will not immediately return to the level of performance they experienced before the decline. 

Fazey and Hardy (1988) invented the Catastrophe Theory of anxiety in sport and performance after identifying problems with the ‘Inverted-U hypothesis’, including the lack of consideration for the multi-dimensionality of the stress response.

The Catastrophe Theory also builds on MAT because it considers both cognitive and somatic anxiety, and how these components of anxiety interact and influence an athlete.

Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning

One of the most popular explanations for the relationship between arousal and performance is the model of Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning (Hanin, 1997, 2000).

IZOF proposes that the way people react to anxiety is highly individualized: some tend to succeed when anxiety is low while others tend to succeed when anxiety is high. It means that when athletes’ pre-competition anxiety is within or near an individual optimal zone, and a preferred level of anxiety, their performance is successful. On the other hand, if an athlete experiences too much or too little anxiety, this can hinder the performance.

Moreover, the Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning theory also considers how factors such as personality, the task performed, and the stage of learning can all have an impact on arousal levels. It clearly shows there is no one-solution-fit-all strategy when it comes to coping with anxiety. Arousal game plan should be tailored to each athlete’s needs.

Next, we will look at different strategies to effectively manage your pre-competion and competition arousal and anxiety levels.