AASP Newsletter - October 2016

J. Davis VanderVeen, M.S., IUPUI
Zachary Brandon, B.S., Linfield College

Sport, exercise, and performance psychology is a science-driven field that aims to study the psychological factors associated with participation and performance in sport, exercise, and physical activity (American Psychological Association [APA], 2016). This science-driven approach involves understanding the theory, research, and practice triad – a cycle of interdependent professional activities through which the field of sport psychology is strengthened (Carron, 1993). This process provides stronger evidence for techniques used in sport psychology rather than merely a “bag of tricks” (Anshel, 2011).  To demonstrate the importance of evidence-based practice, this article will explain each component of the process and provide a practical example using the scenario of a basketball player who reports difficulty shooting free throws in pressure situations (e.g., in the last few minutes of close games).

Theory
Several theories could be used to explain the decrease in performance during “pressure situations,” such as self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), explicit monitoring theory (Beilock & Carr, 2001), and the theory of reinvestment (Masters & Maxwell, 2008). For example, according to self-efficacy theory, an athlete’s performance in a given task is influenced by factors such as past performances, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, or emotional/physiological arousal. In this case, it is possible that the athlete has not experienced successful free throw attempts during “pressure situations,” which in turn, elicits heightened levels of anxiety and arousal. Self-efficacy theory would suggest that if an athlete experienced more successful free throw attempts during “pressure situations,” his/her performance during games might subsequently increase due to an increase in mastery-driven self-efficacy. How this issue is conceptualized impacts what the consultant believes should be done to improve performance. Theories inform research and practice directions, but these domains reciprocally influence theory as well.

Research
An important component of our work as sport psychology consultants is to be able to provide scientific evidence that our selected interventions work. It is insufficient to rely on anecdotal reports that a certain technique is beneficial to performance. As researchers, we attempt to replicate findings from previous studies in different populations, in various settings, and across time in order to establish generalizability to a given practitioner’s population of interest. In the case of the aforementioned basketball player, a researcher using self-efficacy theory may attempt to enhance free throw shooting percentage late in games by improving confidence and self-efficacy through imagery. If self-efficacy in free throw shooting ability was changed, anxiety reduced, and free throw percentage improved, this particular study would show support for this cognitive theory. If, however, anxiety was not reduced, but there was still an improvement in free throw percentage, the technique of imagery might still be considered effective, but self-efficacy theory would need to be adapted (e.g., exclude the anxiety mechanism). In this way, research informs practical application by showing that a technique is effective, but also informs theory by revealing that perhaps anxiety does not play a big role in this particular instance. In fact, research has supported the use of imagery to improve free-throw shooting performance in the lab (Peynirciğlu, Thompson, & Tanielian, 2000), as well as practice and real-game settings (Kearns & Crossman, 2002).

Practice
Research evidence of a technique is a safeguard that there is a higher probability of a successful outcome. If a selected technique lacks sufficient research support or has been understudied (as is often the case), there is a lower probability of the intervention being successful. Practitioners use their theoretical orientation, as well as their familiarity with research and the specific athlete, to select the intervention most likely to be successful (Poczwardowski, Sherman, & Ravizza, 2004).  Using the free-throw example, one consultant may view the issue of missing free throws at the end of a game from a cognitive perspective, whereby the player experiences low self-efficacy, which is exacerbated in “high pressure” situations. This consultant would be more likely to select interventions derived from theories based in cognition (e.g., self-efficacy theory), leading to implementing an imagery intervention. Alternatively, another consultant may adopt a behavioral perspective, whereby the issue is attributed to an athlete’s increased level of fatigue towards the end of games. This consultant would be more likely to select behavior-oriented interventions such as deep breathing relaxation to focus energy on executing shot mechanics. Depending on the success of either intervention used, the resulting outcome can inform both research and theory of a technique that has been successful. In turn, additional research support is needed to create a sound theory that generalizes across populations.

Conclusion
Being a sport psychology consultant means having a working understanding of the interactions between theory, research, and practice. However, ongoing communication between researchers and practitioners in sport psychology is essential if we wish to eliminate the artificial boundary that has existed between these activities (APA, 2016). Researchers need to communicate their findings with practitioners through well-written, transparent writing and offering training opportunities in techniques. Conversely, practitioners need to communicate the results of using such techniques in real-world settings back to the scientific community. Although sport psychology is still very much a developing field of study, the more students and professionals are able to understand the intricacies of this triad, the more we will be able to advance the science of sport psychology.

References

American Psychological Association, Division 47: Society for Sport, Exercise & Performance Psychology (2016). What is exercise psychology and sport psychology? Retrieved from http://www.apadivisions.org/division-47/about/resources/what-is.aspx

Anshel, M. H. (2011). Sport psychology: From theory to practice (5^th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Beilock, S. L., & Carr, T. H. (2001). On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs choking under pressure? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 130, 701-725.

Carron, A. V. (1993). The Coleman Roberts Griffith address: Toward the integration of theory, research, and practice in sport psychology. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 5(2), 207-221.

Kearns, D. W., & Crossman, J. (1992). Effects of a cognitive intervention package on the free-throw performance of varsity basketball players during practice and competition. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 1243-1253.

Masters, R., & Maxwell, J. (2008). The theory of reinvestment. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1, 160-183.

Peynirciğlu, Z. F., Thompson, J. W., & Tanielian, T. B. (2000). Improvement strategies in free- throw shooting and grip-strength tasks. Journal of General Psychology, 127, 145-156.

Poczwardowski, A., Sherman, C. P., & Ravizza, K. (2004). Professional philosophy in the sport psychology service delivery: Building on theory and practice. Sport Psychologist, 18(4), 445-463.