Emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration

This article was downloaded by: [Glasgow Caledonian University] On: 28 November 2012, At: 08:33 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sports Sciences Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20

Emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption in youth sport a

b

Paul J. McCarthy , Mark S. Allen & Marc V. Jones

c

a

Department of Psychology and Allied Health Sciences, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK b

Department of Applied Science, London South Bank University, London, UK

c

Centre for Sport, Health and Exercise Research, Faculty of Health, Staffordshire University, Staffordshire, UK Version of record first published: 31 Oct 2012.

To cite this article: Paul J. McCarthy, Mark S. Allen & Marc V. Jones (2012): Emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption in youth sport, Journal of Sports Sciences, DOI:10.1080/02640414.2012.738303 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.738303

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Sports Sciences, 2012; 1–11, iFirst article

Emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption in youth sport

PAUL J. MCCARTHY1, MARK S. ALLEN2, & MARC V. JONES3 1

Downloaded by [Glasgow Caledonian University] at 08:33 28 November 2012

Department of Psychology and Allied Health Sciences, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK, 2Department of Applied Science, London South Bank University, London, UK, and 3Centre for Sport, Health and Exercise Research, Faculty of Health, Staffordshire University, Staffordshire, UK (Accepted 4 October 2012)

Abstract We explored the relationship between emotions, cognitive interference, concentration disruption and performance in youth sport. In Study 1, 150 youth sport athletes (Mage ¼ 13.13 years, s ¼ 1.79) completed measures of emotion, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption for their most recently completed competition. In Study 2, 46 female rhythmic gymnasts (Mage ¼ 10.30 years, s ¼ 1.74) completed measures of emotion immediately before competition, and measures of cognitive interference and concentration disruption immediately after competition. Study 1 showed that anxiety and dejection were associated with more interfering thoughts and greater disruptions in concentration, whereas the effects of anger and happiness on interfering thoughts differed relative to the age of participants. Specifically, anger was associated with more interfering thoughts only in younger athletes and happiness was associated with fewer interfering thoughts only in older athletes. Study 2 showed that emotions experienced before competition were not strongly associated with cognitive interference or concentration disruption, but athletes reporting more thoughts of escape in competition were less successful in the competition as measured by objective performance scores. These findings demonstrate that emotions are important for cognitive interference and concentration disruption, and provide some initial evidence that cognitive interference is important for performance in youth sport.

Keywords: attention, developmental level, sport performance

Introduction Emotions such as happiness, excitement and enjoyment permeate successful endeavour in sport (McCarthy, 2011; Uphill & Jones, 2012). Not only do these emotions shape dominant psychological constructs instrumental to performance excellence (e.g. commitment, self-efficacy) but they also nourish physical and psychological well-being (Folkman, 2008; Fredrickson, 1998). Emotions are generally thought to influence action through their effect on cognition (Baumeister, Vohs, DeWall, & Zhang, 2007; Derakshan & Eysenck, 2010). In the present article, we describe two studies that explore the effect of both pleasant (positive valence) and unpleasant (negative valence) emotions on cognitive interference and concentration disruption in an understudied population – youth sport. Understanding the effects of emotion on cognitions in young athletes is valuable because it provides a context to explore

more generally how maturational differences influence the emotion-cognition relationship. Like other achievement settings (e.g., education, vocation) sport is a goal-striving pursuit, and emotions arise when athletes pursue a meaningful goal. More precisely, emotions arise whenever a change emerges in the likelihood of achieving that goal. Pleasant emotions emerge when the chances of success are improved fostering efforts towards goals (Oatley & Johnson-Laird, 1987) but changes thwarting the likelihood of success evoke unpleasant emotions and disengagement from goals (Wrosch, Scheier, Miller, Schutz, & Carver, 2003). To explain how emotions can influence performance, we consider several conceptual models that detail how emotion can be both distracting to participants and conversely might also help direct attention towards task relevant cues and facilitate task-appropriate patterns of thinking.

Correspondence: Paul J. McCarthy, Department of Psychology and Allied Health Sciences, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK. E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 0264-0414 print/ISSN 1466-447X online Ó 2012 Taylor & Francis http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.738303


2

P.J. McCarthy et al.

One emotion that has received considerable attention in performance situations is anxiety. Attentional control theory (ACT; Eysenck & Derakshan, 2011; Eysenck, Derakshan, Santos, & Calvo, 2007) predicts that anxious individuals are more susceptible to poor performance because they focus more frequently on potential threats in the environment. This is because anxiety impairs the shifting (which involves using attentional control to shift attention optimally within and between tasks) and inhibition (which involves using attentional control to resist disruption of interference from task-irrelevant stimuli) functions of the attention system (Eysenck et al., 2007). Several researchers have supported the main predictions of ACT and have shown that anxious sport performers fixate more frequently on threatening or irrelevant stimuli in the environment (Moran, Byrne, & McGlade, 2002; Murray & Janelle, 2003; Wilson, Wood, & Vine, 2009; Wilson, Vine, & Wood, 2009). Unpleasant emotions, such as anxiety, can also lead to ruminating about irrelevant thoughts that distract athletes because they expend mental resources that would otherwise serve to execute the task. This phenomenon – cognitive interference – reflects task-irrelevant, self-preoccupied thinking including components of worry about performance (Sarason, Sarason, & Pierce, 1990). Put simply, interfering thoughts divert attention from taskrelevant cues and consume cognitive resources. While interfering thoughts often emerge from selffocused attention stemming from unpleasant emotions such as anxiety (Salovey, 1992) the evidence for pleasant emotions is unclear. Although some researchers have reported that pleasant emotions increase self-focus relative to neutral affect, others have failed to uncover any association (Silvia & Abele, 2002). Research in sport has typically focused on the influence of anxiety on external distractions; however, our knowledge of the theoretical mechanisms by which internal distractions disrupt attentional processes is limited for at least three reasons. First, cognitive researchers initially assumed that information flows inward from the outside world, but rarely considered information flowing from long-term memory to working memory (Moran, 2009). Second, external distractions are easier to measure than internal or self-generated distractions (Gouju, Vermersch, & Bouthier, 2007; Moran, 2009) and finally, relatively few validated scales were available to measure internal distractions in sport performers. The development of the Thought Occurrence Questionnaire for Sport (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2000) addressed some of these issues and subsequent research by Hatzigeorgiadis and Biddle (Hatzigeorgiadis, 2002; Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001, 2002)

showed that interfering thoughts are associated with poor concentration and effort in adult sport performers. Research on emotions other than anxiety, and in particular pleasant emotions, has been less frequent. Emotions with positive valence promote flexible, creative, and receptive thought patterns (Isen, 1987) and broaden attention to improve emotional wellbeing (Fredrickson, 1998). Pleasant emotions can widen the scope of attention and broaden behavioural repertoires (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005) – key functions for sport performers. According to Fredrickson’s broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 1998), pleasant emotions broaden an individual’s momentary mindset and by doing so help build enduring personal resources. Within the demanding context of competitive sport, pleasant emotions should aid sport performers by directing attentional resources when most needed. Pleasant emotions (amusement, contentment and serenity) have been associated with a broader focus of attention and a greater thought action repertoire (Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005). Participants experiencing a pleasant emotional state indicated a greater range of activities that they would currently like to engage in. Valence is not the only important aspect of emotion and not all pleasant emotions may be associated with a broader focus of attention. The degree to which pleasant emotions broaden attention may depend more on the motivational qualities of those emotions (Gable & Harmon-Jones, 2010). According to the motivational-dimensional model of affect, pleasant emotions high in approach motivation (e.g., desire) will narrow attentional focus, whereas pleasant emotions low in approach motivation (e.g., happiness) will broaden attentional focus (Gable & Harmon-Jones, 2008; Harmon-Jones & Gable, 2009). We have a limited knowledge of attentional processes operating in youth sport populations, and currently little is known about the relationship between cognitive interference and emotional states in youth sport populations (Lane, Harwood, & Nevill, 2005). What is known is that emotion generated behaviour develops early in children and remains stable over time (Izard & Ackerman, 2000). The maturing child adds new behaviours to the repertoire for a particular emotion and these new behaviours complement earlier ones and remain functionally comparable (Baumeister et al., 2007). Current emotions also increase the accessibility of memories of past behaviour in a comparable emotional state (see Bower, 1994). Specifically, anxious conditions interfere with current behaviour because these conditions remind us of behaviours that occurred under similar emotional conditions. In other words, emotional memories interfere with current cognitive processing. Because young athletes


Concentration and emotion in sport rarely feature in the limited research on attention in sport, it hampers our ability to instruct coaches and teachers about the optimal emotional balance for skill learning, training, and competition. Understanding the effects of emotion on thought processes of young athletes is valuable because not only could we begin to understand how and why they become distracted but we could also foster developmentally appropriate attentional strategies for future performances (Gould, Diffenbach, & Moffatt, 2002). Researchers in paediatric sport psychology have tended to neglect changes in cognitive structures limiting our understanding of maturational differences in psychological behaviours (Weiss & Bredemeier, 1983). Although this trend is changing (e.g., McCarthy, Jones, & Clark-Carter, 2008), researchers need to ground paediatric sport research on sound cognitive developmental criteria and the recent development of normative transitions of athletes throughout their lifespan aids this process (Wylleman & Lavallee, 2004). By examining differences in cognitive interference scores among young athletes, we can begin to understand the effects and pressures of these transitions on young athletes (Lane et al., 2005) and we can propose age-appropriate interventions to establish quality sport psychology services for youth sport organisations and their teams (Visek, Harris, & Blom, 2009). In sum, we have a limited knowledge of the relation between attention, cognitive interference and emotional states in youth sport populations. Research in adult populations has shown that anxiety can cause interfering thoughts (Sarason et al., 1990) and that such interfering thoughts can disrupt concentration (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001). In this study we shift the focus from an adult to a youth sport population, move beyond the exclusive focus on anxiety to a broader range of pleasant and unpleasant emotions, explore developmental differences that might occur within these relationships, and consider emotions, cognitive interference and concentration disruption concurrently in a mediation model (based on the directionally hypothesised relationships outlined by Sarason et al., 1990). It was hypothesised that pleasant emotions would be negatively associated with cognitive interference and concentration disruption, unpleasant emotions would be positively associated with cognitive interference and concentration disruption, and cognitive interference would be positively associated with concentration disruption. It was further hypothesised that concentration disruption would relate to emotions through the variance shared with internal thoughts (a mediation effect). No specific hypotheses were made regarding developmental differences.

3

Study 1 method Participants One hundred and fifty youth sport participants (Mage ¼ 13.13 years, standard deviation (s) ¼ 1.79, range ¼ 10 years – 16 years) representing the sampling (ages 6–12) and specialising (ages 13–16) years of sport participation (Coˆte´, 1999) were recruited to take part in the study. All participants recruited had a minimum of three years’ experience in organised sport and were competing at county or regional level in Central England. Measures Emotions. The Sport Emotion Questionnaire (SEQ; Jones, Lane, Bray, Uphill, & Catlin, 2005) was used to assess emotional experience before competition. Psychometric evaluation of the SEQ has provided good support through face, content, factorial, and concurrent validity (Jones et al., 2005). The SEQ is a 22-item self-report measure of precompetitive emotion that assesses anger (e.g., annoyed), anxiety (e.g., uneasy), dejection (e.g., unhappy), excitement (e.g., enthusiastic), and happiness (e.g., joyful). Participants were instructed to indicate, for each of the 22 items, how they felt immediately before their most recent competition on a 5-point scale (not at all, a little, moderately, quite a bit, extremely). Although the SEQ has not been validated in youth sport, the questionnaire has shown evidence of concurrent validity with the Brunel Mood Scale (BRUMS; Terry, Lane, Lane, & Keohane, 1999), – a measure of emotion in youth sport. The BRUMS was derived from the Profile of Mood States (McNair, Lorr, & Droppelman, 1971) and includes one pleasant emotion and five unpleasant emotions. We chose to use the SEQ in preference to the BRUMS to have a more balanced number of pleasant and unpleasant emotions. Cognitive interference. Cognitive interference was measured using the Thought Occurrence Questionnaire for Sport (TOQS; Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2000). This 17-item self-report questionnaire comprises three subscales assessing the frequency of internal distractions – performance worries (e.g. ‘‘that I am not going to win this competition’’), situation-irrelevant thoughts (e.g. ‘‘about what I’m going to do when I get home’’), and thoughts of escape (e.g. ‘‘that I am fed up with it’’). The TOQS assesses athletes’ susceptibility to cognitive interference during sport performance and allows researchers to explore the mechanisms underlying athletes’ internal distractions. Participants were instructed to complete the questionnaire in relation to their most recent sport encounter. The factorial validity of this

4



scale has been supported in both adult (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2000) and youth sport (Lane et al., 2005) populations. Concentration disruption. The concentration disruption subscale of the Sport Anxiety Scale-2 (SAS-2; Smith, Smoll, Cumming, & Grossbard, 2006) was used to assess the degree to which participants experienced concentration disruption before and during sport competitions. Participants were instructed to respond to each of the five items (e.g. ‘‘it is hard for me to focus on what I am supposed to do’’) in relation to how they felt during their most recent sporting encounter on a 4-point scale (not at all, a little, pretty much, very much). The factorial validity of this scale has been supported in both sampling (ages 9–12) and specialising (ages 13–16) age groups in sport (Grossbard, Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2009; Smith et al., 2006). Procedure Before data collection, ethical approval was granted by the university research ethics committee. We randomly selected schools in our locality from the Department of Education and Skills list of all primary and secondary schools. Parents received a letter to explain the aim of the study and their right to withdraw their child at any time. Upon gaining parental consent and child assent, we conducted a pilot study to check the suitability of measures with 25 participants from the sampling years and 25 participants from the specialising years. The children reported that they understood the questionnaires and tests of internal reliability confirmed the suitability of the measures for these children. For the main data collection, participants completed the questionnaires in a classroom setting during school hours with the first author and a class teacher present. Participants received verbal instructions to complete the questionnaires and they were encouraged to ask questions if they found any items unclear or confusing. Data analyses Multiple sequential regression analyses were used to explore how emotions relate to concentration variables. Because the age of participants bridged the sampling and specialising years of sport participation we first controlled for developmental level by adding age as a predictor at Step 1. The five emotions (main effects) were then added at Step 2. To explore how developmental level might affect the relationship between emotions and concentration variables, interaction effects between emotions and age were entered on the final step of the analysis. Analyses were run for concentration disruption, performance

worries, situation-irrelevant thoughts, thoughts of escape, and for a combined cognitive interference score. For each analysis data were checked for multivariate outliers using Cook’s distance. Values differing substantially from the other cases (greater than 0.10) were removed from the data set (between two and four cases for each regression analysis) and we report findings from the data with outliers removed. Interaction terms were computed from standardised scores of emotion and age to prevent high correlations between main and interaction terms. When a significant interaction is identified it is common to further explore the effect to better understand the structure of the relation. Significant interactions were depicted and regions of significance were computed to identify the precise value of the modifying variable (age) when the independent variable (emotion) becomes significant (Preacher, Curran, & Bauer, 2006). Because interfering thoughts are proposed to cause disruptions in concentration (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001) main and interaction terms showing significant effects on both cognitive interference and concentration disruption were explored for mediating (mediating-moderating) effects (Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007). This procedure was used to establish whether emotions relate to concentration disruption through the variance shared with internal thoughts. Alpha was set at 0.05 for all analyses. Study 1 results Means, standard deviations, and correlations for all variables are shown in Table I. Findings from the main analyses are reported in Table II. Performance worries We first explored the effect of emotions and age on performance worries. A significant effect was shown for anxiety (b ¼ 0.35, P 5 0.01) and dejection (b ¼ 0.21, P 5 0.05) at Step 2 (DR2 ¼ 0.18, P 5 0.01). The positive regression coefficients indicate that higher levels of anxiety and dejection were associated with greater performance worries. A significant effect was also shown for the interaction of age and happiness (b ¼ 70.33, P 5 0.01) and the interaction of age and anger (b ¼ 70.19, P 5 0.05) at Step 3 (DR2 ¼ 0.08, P 5 0.01). The form of these interactions was such that happiness was associated with fewer performance worries only for older athletes, whereas anger was associated with greater performance worries only for younger athletes. Specifically, the effect of anger on performance worries was significant below 70.79 standard deviations in the mean age of participants (an absolute

5

Concentration and emotion in sport Table I. Descriptive statistics and correlations for all variables in Study 1.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Anxiety Dejection Anger Excitement Happiness Concentration disruption Performance worries Situation7irrelevant thoughts Thoughts of escape

Mean

s

a

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1.03 0.35 0.64 2.58 2.52 1.59 2.66 2.38 1.89

0.70 0.48 0.85 1.01 1.03 0.49 1.10 1.29 1.04

0.71 0.69 0.84 0.80 0.85 0.72 0.77 0.86 0.86

0.36** 0.36** 0.16 0.01 0.25** 0.44** 0.31** 0.35**

0.55** 70.12 70.13 0.47** 0.32** 0.18* 0.40**

70.02 70.10 0.38** 0.13 0.16 0.26**

0.65** 70.22** 0.00 70.04 70.26**

70.17* 70.07 0.01 70.27**

0.35** 0.40** 0.58**

0.60** 0.68**

0.64**


*P 5 0.05, **P 5 0.01, N ¼ 150.

value of 11.72 years), and the effect of happiness on performance worries was significant above 0.86 standard deviations in the mean age of participants (an absolute value of 14.67 years). Situation-irrelevant thoughts For situation-irrelevant thoughts, a significant main effect was shown for anxiety (b ¼ 0.23, P 5 0.05) at Step 2 (DR2 ¼ 0.09, P 5 0.05), and a significant interaction effect was shown for anger and age (b ¼ 70.27, P 5 0.05) at Step 3 (DR2 ¼ 0.07, P 5 0.05). The form of these effects was such that higher levels of anxiety were associated with more situation-irrelevant thoughts, whereas anger was associated with more situation-irrelevant thoughts only in younger athletes. Specifically, the effect of anger on interfering thoughts was significant below 70.03 standard deviations in the mean age of participants (an absolute value of 13.08 years).

for the combined index – anxiety (b ¼ 0.35, P 5 0.01) emerged as the only salient variable at Step 2 (DR2 ¼ 0.17, P 5 0.01) and significant effects were shown for the interaction of anger and age (b ¼ 70.23, P 5 0.05) and happiness and age (b ¼ 70.23, P 5 0.05) at Step 3 (DR2 ¼ 0.06, P 5 0.05). The form of these effects was analogous to those shown on individual components of cognitive interference. Concentration disruption Finally, we explored the effect of age and emotion on concentration disruption. Significant effects were shown for anxiety (b ¼ 0.16, P 5 0.05), dejection (b ¼ 0.23, P 5 0.05) and anger (b ¼ 0.21, P 5 0.05) at Step 2 (DR2 ¼ 0.30, P 5 0.01), with no significant effects at Step 3. The positive regression coefficients indicate that greater levels of anxiety, dejection and anger were associated with more disruptions in concentration.

Thoughts of escape For thoughts of escape, a significant main effect was again shown for anxiety (b ¼ 0.23, P 5 0.01) at Step 2 (DR2 ¼ 0.17, P 5 0.01), and a significant interaction effect was shown for happiness and age (b ¼ 70.25, P 5 0.01) at Step 3 (DR2 ¼ 0.06, P 5 0.05). These effects were such that anxiety was associated with more thoughts of escape, whereas happiness was associated with fewer thoughts of escape but only in older athletes. Specifically, the effect of happiness on interfering thoughts becomes significant above -0.34 standard deviations in the mean age of participants (an absolute value of 12.52 years). Cognitive interference composite score Because some level of consistency was shown across analyses, scores were combined to create a single unitary index of cognitive interference (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2000). Similar effects were shown

Mediation Because no significant interactive effects were shown on concentration disruption, only main effects of anxiety and dejection satisfied criteria to explore mediating effects. A four-step method was used in analyses. First, a regression analysis with concentration disruption as the criterion variable and dejection as the predictor variable demonstrated a significant effect that may be mediated (b ¼ 0.47, P 5 0.01). Next, a regression analysis with dejection as the predictor variable and performance worries as the criterion variable showed a significant correlation between dejection and the mediator (b ¼ 0.32, P 5 0.01). Next, using concentration disruption as the criterion variable in a regression equation with performance worries entered at Step 1 and dejection included at Step 2, we found that performance worries (the mediator) was correlated with concentration disruption (b ¼ 0.35, P 5 0.01), and remained significant when controlling for dejection

70.02 0.10 70.23* 0.13 70.23* (0.08) (0.10) (0.08) (0.10) (0.09)

0.01 70.07 70.09 0.09 70.25**

70.02 0.10 70.21 0.13 70.20

(0.08) (0.11) (0.09) (0.10) (0.09)

(b ¼ 0.28, P 5 0.01). In this last step, when we controlled for performance worries, the relationship between dejection and concentration disruption remained significant (b ¼ 0.39, P 5 0.01), although its effect was significantly reduced (z ¼ 3.10, P 5 0.01). Thus, findings point towards a partial mediation. Because anxiety was associated with all three components of cognitive interference, mediating effects were explored for the composite score only. First, anxiety was correlated with concentration disruption (b ¼ 0.25, P 5 0.01) – a significant effect that could be mediated. Next, a regression analysis with cognitive interference as the criterion variable and anxiety as the predictor also showed a significant positive association (b ¼ 0.42, P 5 0.01). Finally, using concentration disruption as the criterion variable with cognitive interference and anxiety as predictors, it was found that cognitive interference was correlated with concentration disruption (b ¼ 0.51, P 5 0.01) and remained significant with the inclusion of anxiety (b ¼ 0.49, P 5 0.01). In this last step, the relationship between anxiety and concentration disruption did not remain significant (b ¼ 0.04, P 4 0.50) pointing towards a full mediating effect of anxiety on concentration disruption through interfering thoughts (z ¼ 4.43, P 5 0.01).

70.13 0.15 70.27* 0.09 70.19 (0.12) (0.15) (0.13) (0.14) (0.13) 70.15 0.17 70.31 0.11 70.22

0.01 70.08 70.07 0.08 70.22 (0.10) (0.12) (0.09) (0.11) (0.10)

Step 1 Age Step 2 Anxiety Dejection Anger Excitement Happiness Step 3 Anxiety*Age Dejection*Age Anger*Age Excitement*Age Happiness*Age

0.05 70.11 70.12 70.07 0.05 (0.04) (0.06) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) 0.03 70.05 70.06 70.04 0.02

70.02 0.18 0.20 0.20 70.34

70.02 0.15 70.19* 0.18 70.33**

Study 1 discussion

*P 5 0.05, **P 5 0.01.

0.35** 0.11 0.01 70.16 0.06 (0.11) (0.19) (0.10) (0.09) (0.09) 0.45 0.23 0.01 70.14 0.05 0.23** 0.16 0.02 70.19 70.09 (0.10) (0.17) (0.09) (0.09) (0.08) 0.23* 0.12 0.01 70.08 0.05 (0.15) (0.25) (0.14) (0.12) (0.12) (0.13) (0.21) (0.11) (0.10) (0.10) 0.16* 0.23* 0.21* 70.16 70.07 (0.05) (0.10) (0.06) (0.05) (0.05) 0.10 0.23 0.13 70.08 70.03

0.53 0.50 70.20 70.06 0.03

0.35** 0.21* 70.16 70.06 0.03

0.37 0.27 0.02 70.09 0.05

0.29 0.30 0.02 70.16 70.08

70.03 70.01 (0.04) 70.10 70.07 70.13 70.03 (0.02)

0.05 (0.05)

0.09

70.05 (0.05)

70.05 (0.04)

b b B b(SE)

b

b(SE)

b

b(SE)

b(SE)

b(SE)

Cognitive interference composite score Performance worries

Situation irrelevant thoughts

Thoughts of escape


Concentration disruption

Table II. Regression analyses for emotions on concentration disruption and cognitive interference.


6

This first study explored the relationship between emotions, cognitive interference and concentration disruption in young athletes. For athletes spanning both the sampling and specialising age ranges, higher levels of dejection and anxiety were associated with a greater occurrence of cognitive interference and concentration disruption. The relationship between anger and cognitive interference, and between happiness and cognitive interference, differed relative to the age of participants. Specifically, anger was more influential in the sampling years and happiness more influential in the specialising years. These findings highlight the importance of understanding athlete thought processes from a developmental perspective and from a practical angle suggest that emotion-based interventions (targeting attentional control) would do well to take into consideration the age of young athletes. This study reinforces the idea that cognitive interference is important for concentration levels, as shown in adult sport performers (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001), and provides evidence that emotions have an important role in this relationship. Specifically, it was shown that dejection (partially) and anxiety (fully) relate to concentration disruption through the variance shared with interfering thoughts. This finding implies that other important factors may be involved in how

7


Concentration and emotion in sport dejection relates to concentration (e.g. motivation processes) but that interfering thoughts is the sole factor involved in how anxiety relates to disruptions in concentration. We can speculate that when children are experiencing unpleasant emotions they become more susceptible to the debilitative effects of negative, irrelevant or irregular thought patterns which result in poor concentration. Our findings suggest that pleasant and unpleasant emotions are associated with negative thought processes and disruptions in concentration. These findings, while theoretically interesting, require further testing in naturally occurring current competitive events. Furthermore, the implications of these findings for sport performance remain unknown. Some evidence is available to suggest that cognitive interference can influence behaviour patterns in adult sport performers (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001) and we would expect performance in youth sport to respond in a similar manner. In the next study, we explore how emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption relate to performance in a meaningful competitive youth sport encounter.

SEQ in relation to how they feel right now, at this moment, in relation to the upcoming competition. Immediately after competition, gymnasts completed the TOQS and the concentration disruption subscale of the SAS-2 in relation to the thoughts they had experienced during the competition. The performance measure used was each child’s points scored in the competition. Statistical analyses Multiple regression analyses were used to explore how emotions relate to cognitive interference and concentration disruption and how emotions, cognitive interference and concentration disruption relate to athletic performance. Because all gymnasts were representative of the sampling years, age-related interaction effects were not explored. For each analysis, data were checked for multivariate outliers using Cook’s distance. Values differing substantially from other cases (greater than 0.10) were removed from the data set (between zero and four cases for each regression analysis) and we report findings from the data with outliers removed. Study 2 results

Study 2 method Participants Participants were 46 female rhythmic gymnasts (Mage ¼ 10.30 years, s ¼ 1.74) who were competing in club and regional events in the UK. The children had been competing in structured competitions for an average of 2.67 years (s ¼ 1.55). Measures and procedure Parents or guardians of each child provided consent for their child to participate in this study, and children assented to participate on the day of the competition. The same measures used in Study 1 were used. Within one hour of starting a competitive routine, gymnasts were instructed to complete the

Initial data screening identified no variance in gymnasts’ reported dejection and anger scores (a score of 0 for all competitors) indicating that gymnasts did not experience these emotions prior to competition. Consequently, these emotions were not included in further analyses. Means, standard deviations, and correlation values for all variables are reported in Table III. Generally, positive correlations were observed (albeit small) between cognitive interference subscales and anxiety, with negative correlations observed between cognitive interference subscales and pleasant emotions (excitement and happiness). First, we explored the relationship between emotions and performance worries. A significant effect was observed for anxiety only (b ¼ 0.40, P 5 0.05) – the positive regression

Table III. Descriptive statistics and correlations for all variables in Study 2.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Anxiety Excitement Happiness Concentration disruption Performance worries Situation7irrelevant thoughts Thoughts of escape Performance (points scored)

Mean

s

a

0.89 2.02 2.15 1.51 2.01 1.52 1.25 23.71

0.71 0.86 1.06 0.27 0.98 0.72 0.67 1.77

0.84 0.75 0.89 0.74 0.80 0.79 0.74

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0.22 70.07 0.16 0.12 0.00 0.05 70.15

0.67** 0.07 70.05 70.19 70.22 70.03

0.07 70.04 70.10 70.21 0.00

0.28 0.12 0.37** 70.18

0.19 0.33* 0.05

0.14 70.12

70.37**

*P 5 0.05, **P 5 0.01 Note: Emotions were measured prior to competition and concentration variables were measured post-competition.


8


coefficient indicating that higher levels of anxiety were associated with a greater occurrence of interfering thoughts (R2 ¼ 0.17, P 5 0.05). No significant effects were observed for situation-irrelevant thoughts (R2 ¼ 0.15, P 5 0.10), thoughts of escape (R2 ¼ 0.03, P 4 0.70), or the combined cognitive interference score (R2 ¼ 0.06, P 4 0.40). Also, emotions did not predict the occurrence of concentration disruption (R2 ¼ 0.03, P 4 0.60). Next, athletic performance was regressed on emotions, cognitive interference and concentration disruption. Performance (total points scored) was set as the criterion variable, with performance worries, situation-irrelevant thoughts, and thoughts of escape entered simultaneously as predictor variables. A significant effect was shown for thoughts of escape only (b ¼ 70.39, P 5 0.01) – the negative regression coefficient indicates that more thoughts of escape experienced during competition were associated with lower performance scores (R2 ¼ 0.18, P 5 0.05). A second regression analysis with emotions included as predictor variables showed no significant effects (R2 ¼ 0.06, P 4 0.30) and no significant association was found between concentration disruption and athletic performance (b ¼ 70.22, P 5 0.20). Because thoughts of escape were not associated with pre-routine emotions, criteria were not satisfied to explore mediating effects. Study 2 discussion In Study 2, we explored how emotions, cognitive interference, and concentration disruption relate to performance in competitive youth gymnastics. Preroutine emotions were not strongly associated with concentration variables, but consistent with fieldbased research in adult populations (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2008), pre-routine anxiety was associated with interfering thoughts in the form of performance worries occurring during competition. The relationship between emotions and cognitions were not as strong as those observed in Study 1 and this may reflect the assessment method used in Study 2. In Study 1, children and adolescents were reflecting on emotions experienced over the whole competition period rather than emotions experienced exclusively before competition. It is likely that emotions experienced during competition have a greater influence on performers (and their internal thoughts) than emotions experienced prior to competition. Alternatively, the relatively small sample size in Study 2 (justified by the demanding data collection the study imposed) may have hidden larger effects. Perhaps the more novel finding emerging from this study was that gymnasts reporting more thoughts of escape during their routine showed lower performance scores. This finding may be indicative of a

threat response that is associated with greater withdrawal and orientation away from the threatening stimulus (Jones, Meijen, McCarthy, & Sheffield, 2009). Thus, it provides initial empirical evidence that cognitive interference is associated with poor athletic performance in youth sport. General discussion The two studies have explored how emotions relate to cognitive interference and concentration disruption in youth sport, including age dependent associations, and how such processes relate to athletic performance. Our findings demonstrate that unpleasant emotions (anxiety and dejection) predict the occurrence of interfering thoughts and concentration disruption. Moreover, the relationship between (pleasant and unpleasant) emotions and cognitive interference differed relative to the age of participants. The studies show an important association between cognitive interference and concentration disruption in youth sport, and demonstrate that emotions relate to concentration disruption through the variance shared with internal thoughts (a mediation effect). Our findings demonstrate that unpleasant emotions (anxiety, dejection, anger) are important for concentration disruption and cognitive interference in the sampling years, whereas both pleasant (happiness) and unpleasant emotions (anxiety, dejection) are important in the specialising years. Moreover, anger appears to have a greater (negative) association with younger athletes’ thought processes, and happiness appears to have a greater (positive) association with older athletes’ thought processes. This finding suggests that the importance of pleasant and unpleasant emotions (for concentration processes) changes as children move through developmental stages. These developmental changes could reflect a fundamental difference in the way younger and older athletes process their internal thoughts. Alternatively, these differences may reflect a learned ability among older athletes (accomplished through greater experience) to maintain concentration through emotionally challenging situations. High activation unpleasant emotions such as anger can disrupt the inhibition function of the attention system, causing priorities to change and shift towards task-irrelevant stimuli (Derakshan & Eysenck, 2010), and athletes with greater experience may be better able to control this natural response tendency to maintain concentration and peak performance. There is an urgent need for further theoretical developments in athlete developmental patterns on this topic. Our findings suggest that interventions targeting cognitive interference and concentration disruption should focus on reducing the occurrence of anxiety and dejection across all age groups. Interventions


Concentration and emotion in sport targeted towards younger athletes should also look to identify techniques that help regulate the occurrence of anger, and interventions targeted towards older athletes should promote techniques that facilitate a high level of happiness. A number of emotional control strategies have been proposed to regulate emotions in sport. These include cognitive restructuring, positive self-statements, visualisation, and relaxation strategies (Lane, Beedie, Jones, Uphill, & Devonport, 2012; Uphill & Jones, 2012). Researchers might wish to further explore the efficacy of these techniques for regulating emotions in youth sport populations (cf. McCarthy, Jones, Harwood, & Davenport, 2010; McCarthy, Jones, Harwood, & Olivier, 2010) and the effects of such interventions on cognitive interference and concentration disruption. Self-defeating negative thoughts have been linked with poor athletic performance in adults (Gould, Eklund, & Jackson, 1992). Furthermore, thoughts of escape have been identified as the most important component of cognitive interference for athlete behaviour patterns (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001). Our findings demonstrate the importance of cognitive interference for performance outcomes in youth sport, and reinforce the idea that thoughts of escape are the primary component of interfering thoughts influencing athletic behaviour. We found that pre-competition emotions did not contribute to this relationship. This finding may reflect the rather negligible role of pre-competition emotions since critical moments occurring during competition can alter feelings and cognitions dramatically (Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2001). Thus, a useful avenue for future research would be to explore the role of emotions in competition, rather than emotions prior to competition, in the cognitive interference-performance relationship. There are a number of other ways researchers could look to build on the findings of the current research. First, the studies reported here do not address causality and future research might look to use longitudinal and/or experimental methods to identify causal relationships. Second, the ideal emotions of athletes can vary across different sports and different sporting situations (Tamir, 2011). It would therefore be useful to explore whether findings transfer to different populations of athletes and different performance situations. Further, that some people are distracted by intrusive thoughts may be more of a characteristic of disposition than situation. In other words, certain personalities may experience more intrusive thoughts than others across a range of evaluative situations (Eysenck & Graydon, 1989; Pierce et al., 1998). In future researchers should explore how these processes differ in athletes with different personalities and this could be the focus of future research on attention and emotion in youth sport.

9

In short, our findings suggest that pleasant and unpleasant emotions relate to cognitive interference and concentration disruption, that emotions relate differently to thought processes relative to the age of participants, and that interfering thoughts are associated with poor athletic performance in youth sport. Emotional control strategies may provide a useful intervention strategy for reducing cognitive interference and we would encourage researchers to continue exploring developmental differences. For instance, cognitive interference has been linked with goal orientations in adults (Hatzigeorgiadis, 2002; Hatzigeorgiadis & Biddle, 2002) and there is some evidence that goal orientations change throughout childhood (Flores, Salguero, & Ma´rquez, 2008). In future researchers should explore the role of task and ego goal orientations on cognitive interference from a developmental perspective. By exploring further developmental differences in youth sport populations, we become better equipped to propose age-appropriate interventions to establish quality sport psychology services for youth sport organisations and their teams. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the help of Matt Crawley and Emma Hunt with data collection.

References Baumeister, R.F., Vohs, K.D., DeWall, C.N., & Zhang, L.Q. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 167–203. Bower, G.H. (1994). Some relations between emotions and memory. In P. Ekman & R.J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion (pp. 303–305). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Coˆte´, J. (1999). The influence of the family in the development of talent in sport. The Sport Psychologist, 13(4), 395–417. Derakshan, N., & Eysenck, M.W. (2010). Introduction to the special issue: Emotional states, attention, and working memory. Cognition and Emotion, 24, 189–199. Eysenck, M.W., & Derakshan, N. (2011). New perspectives in attentional control theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 955–960. Eysenck, M.W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M.G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 7(2), 336–353. Eysenck, M.W., & Graydon, J. (1989). Susceptibility to distraction as a function of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 10(6), 681–687. Flores, J., Salguero, A., & Marquez, S. (2008). Goal orientations and perceptions of the motivational climate in physical education classes among Colombian students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1441–1449. Folkman, S. (2008). The case for positive emotions in the stress process. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 21(1), 3–14. Fredrickson, B.L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300–319. Fredrickson, B.L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Cognition & Emotion, 19(3), 313–332.


10


Fredrickson, B.L., & Losada, M.F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678–686. Gable, P.A., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2008). Approach-motivated positive affect reduces breadth of attention. Psychological Science, 19(5), 476–482. Gable, P.A., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2010). The motivational dimensional model of affect: Implications for breadth of attention, memory, and cognitive categorisation. Cognition & Emotion, 24(2), 322–337. Gouju, J.L., Vermersch, P., & Bouthier, D. (2007). A psychophenomenological approach to sport psychology: The presence of the opponents in hurdle races. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19(2), 173–186. Gould, D., Diffenbach, K., & Moffatt, A. (2002). Psychological characteristics and their development in Olympic champions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14(3), 172–204. Gould, D., Eklund, R.C., & Jackson, S.A. (1992). 1988 U.S. Olympic wrestling excellence: II. Thoughts and affect occurring during competition. The Sport Psychologist, 6(4), 383–402. Grossbard, J.R., Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., & Cumming, S.P. (2009). Competitive anxiety in young athletes: Differentiating somatic anxiety, worry, and concentration disruption. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 22(2), 153–166. Harmon-Jones, E., & Gable, P.A. (2009). Neural activity underlying the effect of approach-motivated positive affect on narrowed attention. Psychological Science, 20(4), 406–409. Hatzigeorgiadis, A. (2002). Thoughts of escape during competition: Relationships with goal orientations and self-consciousness. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3(3), 195–207. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., & Biddle, S.J.H. (2000). Assessing cognitive interference in sport: Development of the Thought Occurrence Questionnaire for Sport. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 13(1), 65–86. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., & Biddle, S.J.H. (2001). Athletes’ perceptions of how cognitive interference during competition influences concentration and effort. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 14(4), 411–429. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., & Biddle, S.J.H. (2002). Cognitive interference during competition among volleyball players with different goal orientation profiles. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20(9), 707–715. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., & Biddle, S.J.H. (2008). Negative self-talk during sport performance: Relationships with pre-competition anxiety and goal-performance discrepancies. Journal of Sport Behavior, 31, 237–253. Isen, A.M. (1987). Positive affect, cognitive processes, and social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 203–253). New York, NY: Academic Press. Izard, C., & Ackerman, B. (2000). Motivational, organizational, and regulatory functions of discrete emotions. In M. Lewis & J.M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 253–264). New York, NY: Guilford. Jones, M.V., Lane, A.M., Bray, S.R., Uphill, M., & Catlin, J. (2005). Development and validation of the sport emotion questionnaire. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 27(4), 407–431. Jones, M.V., Meijen, C., McCarthy, P.J., & Sheffield, D. (2009). A theory of challenge and threat states in athletes. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(2), 161–180. Lane, A.M., Beedie, C.J., Jones, M.V., Uphill, M., & Devonport, T.J. (2012). The BASES expert statement on emotion regulation in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(11), 1189–1195. Lane, A.M., Harwood, C., & Nevill, A.M. (2005). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Thought Occurrence Questionnaire for Sport (TOQS) among adolescent athletes. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 18(3), 245–254. McCarthy, P.J. (2011). Positive emotion in sport performance: Current status and future directions. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 4, 50–69.

McCarthy, P.J., Jones, M.V., & Clark-Carter, D. (2008). Understanding enjoyment in youth sport: A developmental perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9(2), 142–156. McCarthy, P.J., Jones, M.V., Harwood, C.G., & Davenport, L. (2010). Using goal setting to enhance positive affect among junior multievent athletes. Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 4(1), 53–68. McCarthy, P.J., Jones, M.V., Harwood, C.G., & Olivier, S. (2010). What do young athletes implicitly understand about psychological skills? Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 4(2), 158–172. McNair, D.M., Lorr, M., & Droppelman, L.F. (1971). Manual for the profile of mood states. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Services. Moran, A. (2009). Cognitive psychology in sport: Progress and prospects. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(4), 420–426. Moran, A., Byrne, A., & McGlade, N. (2002). The effects of anxiety and strategic planning on visual search behaviour. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20(3), 225–236. Murray, N.P., & Janelle, C.M. (2003). Anxiety and performance: A visual search examination of the Processing Efficiency Theory. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 25(2), 171–187. Oatley, K., & Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1, 29–50. Pierce, G.R., Ptacek, J.T., Taylor, B., Yee, P.L., Henderson, C.A., Lauventi, H.J., & Bourdeau, C. M. (1998). The role of dispositional and situational factors in cognitive interference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1016–1031. Preacher, K.J., Curran, P.J., & Bauer, D.J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448. Preacher, K.J., Rucker, D.D., & Hayes, A.F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. Salovey, P. (1992). Mood-induced self-focused attention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4), 699–707. Sarason, I.G., Sarason, B.R., & Pierce, G.R. (1990). Anxiety, cognitive interference, and performance. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(2), 1–18. Silvia, P.J., & Abele, A.E. (2002). Can positive affect induce selffocused attention? Methodological and measurement issues. Cognition & Emotion, 16(6), 845–853. Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., Cumming, S.P., & Grossbard, J.R. (2006). Measurement of multidimensional sport performance anxiety in children and adults: The Sport Anxiety Scale-2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 28(4), 479–501. Tamir, M. (2011). The maturing field of emotion regulation. Emotion Review, 3, 3–7. Terry, P.C., Lane, A.M., Lane, H.J., & Keohane, L. (1999). Development and validation of a mood measure for adolescents. Journal of Sports Sciences, 17, 861–872. Uphill, M.A., & Jones, M.V. (2012). The consequences and control of emotions in elite athletes. In J. Thatcher, M. Jones, & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Coping and emotion in sport (2nd ed., pp. 213–235). London: Routledge. Visek, A.J., Harris, B.S., & Blom, L.C. (2009). Doing sport psychology: A youth sport consulting model for practitioners. The Sport Psychologist, 23(2), 271–291. Weiss, M.R., & Bredemeier, B.J. (1983). Developmental sport psychology: A theoretical perspective for studying children in sport. Journal of Sport Psychology, 5, 216–230. Wilson, M.R., Vine, S.J., & Wood, G. (2009). The influence of anxiety on visual attentional control in basketball free throw shooting. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 31(2), 152–168. Wilson, M.R., Wood, G., Vine, S.J. (2009). Anxiety, attentional control, and performance impairment in penalty kicks. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 31(6), 761–775.

Concentration and emotion in sport


Wrosch, C., Scheier, M.F., Miller, G.E., Schulz, R., & Carver, C.S. (2003). Adaptive self-regulation of unattainable goals: Goal disengagement, goal reengagement, and subjective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(12), 1494–1508.

11

Wylleman, P., & Lavallee, D. (2004). A developmental perspective on transitions faced by athletes. In M. Weiss (Ed.), Developmental sport and exercise psychology: A lifespan perspective (pp. 507–527). Morgantown, WY: Fitness Information Technology.