Data for Performance and Decision Making under Monitoring and Outcome Pressurere
High-pressure conditions have different components that are likely to have different effects on performance, which may lead to underlying mechanisms of performance decrements, such as distraction or self-focus. pressure is divided into two categories of monitoring pressure and outcome pressure. Performing in the presence of the camera, the coach, the teammate or the spectator is called ‘monitoring pressure’. In contrast, other pressure factors, such as trying to achieve a goal, achieving a credible reward, setting a record or ranking is called ‘outcome pressure’. They acknowledged that monitoring pressure led to direct focus of attention on self or task and the outcome pressure led to distract the athlete from performing the task. A complete description of this hypothesis and the probability of decrease performance under pressure are obtained by considering the type of task. It is noted that monitoring pressure led to disruption of performing tasks that relied less on working memory (such as motor tasks) and the outcome pressure led to reduction in performance in cognitive tasks. In our study, the researchers decided to examine the different effects of pressure on different aspects of skill. For this purpose, a table tennis task was used, which includes both the motor aspect (a component in skilled athletes that relies less on working memory) and decision-making (cognitive component of skill). In addition to the environmental conditions and the ongoing task, considering a type of athlete's personality trait (reinvestment) that may lead him/her to self-focus or distraction under pressure situations can be helpful. In our study, the relationships between reinvestment and performance and decision making were measured in table tennis. This sport involves skills perform fast, and the athlete will have little opportunity to engage in the reinvestment process. . Therefore, the aim of this research was to investigate the performance and decision-making on table tennis topspin skill of elite athletes under different conditions of pressure. Forehand and backhand topspin of 20 expert table tennis athletes was examined under low, monitoring and outcome pressure. The decision making and performance scores were examined in a within-group design. Relationship between Reinvestment traits and dependent variables across low and high pressure also tested. Results showed the effects of pressure conditions on somatic and cognitive anxiety were significant. Decision-making accuracy under outcome pressure and decision-making speed under the both pressure conditions were decreased. The performance of athletes was decreased under the monitoring pressure while no change was observed in performance under outcome pressure. Decision reinvestment could predict speed accuracy changes under both pressure conditions and motor self-consciousness could predict performance changes under monitoring pressure.
Steps to reproduce
Subjects: Twenty male table tennis professionals with an average age of 25 ± 6 years and the experience of 12 ± 3 years Instruments: Ball server machine Decision specific reinvestment scale (DSRS) Movement specific reinvestment scale (MSRS) Competitive sport anxiety inventory-2 (CSAI-2) Task The task included hitting the forehand and backhand topspin shots on the white and orange balls respectively sent by the ball server. In this task, the subjects were asked to respond to the orange balls by backhand and the white balls by forehand. Simultaneously with sending of each ball, the light on one side of the ball thrower was accidentally turned on, and the subjects had to hit their balls to the other side (where the light was off) in the rated area. The amount of the earned points was the criterion for the performance of the subjects. To calculate performance scores, the total scores that the subjects gained by performing forehand and backhand topspin to the scoring areas were used. The balls that hit the most corner area received 5 points, while the inner areas received 4, 3 and 2 points, respectively. The balls that hit the other areas of the table scored 1 point and the balls that hit the net or went out or did not hit the racket were given zero points. In this task, hitting the corresponding hit with the color of the ball (orange for backhand and white for forehand) and sending it to the correct direction (based on the light) was considered as the criterion for decision-making accuracy of the subjects. Decisions that were correct in both the type of skill and the location of the hit were scored 2. 1 point was given to the decisions that one of these two is correct and no points were given to the completely wrong decisions (in the type of skill and place of the hit). To calculate the decision speed (reaction time), the time between the instant the ball was detached from the ball server until the first backward movement of the racket's head or the body's movement for the correct placement for the hit was calculated (to help the proper diagnosis of the moment of movement of the body or rocket to start hitting, a coach with 20 years of coaching experience was used). Procedure The test was divided into three blocks. The subjects were asked to stand in front of a table and ball thrower machine and make 60 attempts in the form of the first block (without pressure). At this stage, no camera or other person was exposed to the subject sight. Before executing each of the next blocks, the desired interventions were applied to create pressure. In the next block, 60 attempts were executed under monitoring pressure, and in the last block, 60 attempts were made under outcome pressure. After every 20 attempts, the subjects rested for 2 minutes to prevent fatigue.