D. MCEWAN ET AL.
Results
The shot percentage for the low-pressure condition in the
warm up round was 34.4%, compared to 33.2% for the moder-
ate-pressure condition, and 37.1% for the high-pressure condi-
tion. A one-way ANOVA revealed that successful shot per-
centages on the five warm up shots were not significantly dif-
ferent between the three conditions (i.e., regardless of condition,
participants were equally likely to make a given shot during the
warm up), F(118) = .25, p = .78. Ten out of 39 participants
(25.6%) in the low-pressure condition successfully made the
subsequent tiebreaker shot, compared to 13 out of 38 partici-
pants (34.2%) in the moderate-pressure condition, and 20 out of
42 participants in the high-pressure condition. The binary logis-
tic regression revealed that condition was a significant predictor
of performance on the tiebreaker shot. As hypothesized, par-
ticipants in the high-pressure warm up condition were more
likely to make the tiebreaker shot than participants in the
low-pressure warm up condition, Wald = 4.09, β = .97, p = .043.
Contrary to hypothesis, participants in the moderate-pressure
condition did not perform significantly better than those in the
low-pressure condition, Wald = .67, β = .41, p = .413.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to determine whether warming
up under high pressure would predict better performance on a
subsequent high-pressure athletic task compared to warming up
under moderate or low pressure. In partial support of our hy-
pothesis, participants who warmed up under high pressure per-
formed significantly better on the high-pressure tiebreaker shot
than those who completed the warm up under low pressure.
This finding provides an important contribution to the literature
on performing under pressure. Specifically, it suggests that a
brief warm up under pressure may be a beneficial way for im-
proving performance in subsequent clutch situations.
The results of this study complement the findings of previous
studies, which have shown that training in an environment that
simulates the high-pressure circumstances that occur during
athletic competition results in improved performance when
these situations subsequently arise (Beilock & Carr, 2001;
Oudejans & Pijpers, 2009; Oudejans & Pijpers, 2010). In addi-
tion to training for high-pressure situations (i.e., during prac-
tices), our results indicate that it seems beneficial to briefly
warm up for these situations (i.e., just prior to when they are
expected to occur). Furthermore, as our initial round of putting
consisted of a mere five shots, it seems that this warm up need
not be overly exhaustive. As such, athletes—as well as coaches
and/or sport psychologists—could easily employ this technique
without interfering with the normal preparation for competition.
Preparing for high-pressure situations can be viewed as analo-
gous to preparing oneself, physically. That is, to ensure high
athletic performance, a muscle or physical skill must first be
trained in a manner that simulates the physical demands that
will occur during an upcoming competition. Then, just prior to
the competition, the athlete must stretch and warm up to also
help ensure optimal performance. In much the same way,
preparation for the psychological demands of a forthcoming
high-pressure competition should occur during training and also
while warming up immediately before the competition.
This study provides further support for the utility of the ex-
plicit monitoring theory as a guiding framework for improving
athletic performance under pressure. This theory posits that,
under pressure, self-consciousness increases and individuals
attend to the step-by-step processes involved in completing a
motor task, which impairs performance (Baumeister, 1984;
Beilock & Gray, 2007). However, this theory also suggests that
familiarizing oneself with the conditions that will result in this
conscious control of the skill is a beneficial way of improving
performance under pressure (Baumeister, 1984). Indeed, the
psychological demands on an athlete to perform well under
high pressure are different than in normal competitive situations
(Beilock & Carr, 2001; Beilock & Gray, 2007). By preparing
for these demands in training and just prior to competition ath-
letes can become better able to deal with the self-regulatory
demands of high-pressure circumstances. In turn, this prepara-
tion can result in improved performance during clutch situations.
Limitations
While the results of this study provide a novel contribution to
the literature of performance under pressure, it is not without its
limitations. For one, our sample consisted of undergraduate
psychology students. As such, it may be premature to suggest
that these results generalize to athletes. Secondly, while the
purpose of not having participants interact with other alleged
competitors (e.g., a study confederate) in the experiment was to
prevent any group dynamics effects, the resulting manner in
which the current study was conducted is somewhat artificial
compared to real-world sporting competitions. Thirdly, while
being debriefed, most participants in the high-pressure warm up
condition claimed that they felt high pressure to perform well,
while most in the low-pressure condition indicated that they felt
little or no pressure to perform well. However, a more rigorous
manipulation check would be valuable to help quantify the
amount of pressure (or other emotions such as anxiety) that
participants may have experienced.
Future Directions
Discovering the most beneficial ways in which athletes can
perform optimally in high-pressure situations continues to be a
focus for numerous researchers in the field of sport psychology.
The results from the current study are the first to suggest that it
may be helpful for athletes to warm up under conditions that
simulate the impending high-pressure situations that will arise
during competition, and it would be valuable that additional
tests of this hypothesis be carried out. For instance, it may
prove beneficial to test this hypothesis with elite athletes to
confirm that these results generalize to this population. Also,
our warm up was quite brief, consisting of only five putts. Al-
though this was intentional to show that warming up for subse-
quent high-pressure situations need not be extensive, it would
be valuable to determine the ideal length of time of a warm up
(i.e., the dose-response relationship between warming up and
subsequent performance under pressure). Future research
should also assess the combination of the optimal training and
warm up situations that best replicate the experience of
high-pressure competitions and, in turn, improve performance
in actual competitions, thereafter.
REFERENCES
Baumeister, R. F. (1984). Choking under pressure: Self-consciousness
Copyright © 2012 SciRes.
146