Mind over matter: When perception trumps reality

By Alexandria Olton

TRINBAGONIANS have a very unique way of incorporating the word stress into our everyday language. We use it to command a behaviour, describe something we’re enduring, and also explain how we’re feeling: “Doh stress nah,” “I have real stress,” or “I feeling stressed.”

The origins of the word “stress,” however, finds its genesis in the study of physics. Scientists referred to stress as the interaction between a force and the resistance to counter that force. It was not until the 1930s that Hungarian-Canadian endocrinologist Hans Selye described it as “the nonspecific response of the body to any demand.” But stress is not always a bad thing, although many of us describe it as such…We must keep in mind that stress can be both adaptive (helpful) or maladaptive (harmful) particularly to athletic performance.

Daily, human beings are bombarded with stimuli or demands from the external world. From tasks we are required to complete for work or school, demands of personal and professional relationships, to the television shows we watch and the social media content we interact with for hours on end. Likewise, athletes and performers are met with demands such as training schedules that must be adhered to, training plans that must be fulfilled, obtaining a particular ranking at a competition and competing to be selected for a team. So why is it that when two athletes are placed in the same situation one might thrive while the other might not? Why do some demands energise us while others instil fear or dread? The answer lies with our perception of the situation.

When we are met with demands (external stimuli) a very swift cognitive process takes place known as the challenge/threat appraisal. This process is a swift cognitive analysis of what we perceive is being asked of us (the demand) and whether we believe that we have what it takes to complete it successfully (our resources). When we appraise that our resources outweigh the demands, we enter what is known as the challenge state sometimes called Eustress. Within this state, an athlete feels energised, focused, motivated, on the attack and they are competing to win. However, when we appraise that the demands outweigh our resources we enter into a threat state sometimes referred to as distress. Within this state an athlete feels fearful, experiences anxiety, is less energetic, conservative, hesitant, and ultimately competing not to lose.

So, what influences athletes entering challenge states versus threat states? As with most other sport psychological concepts, the answer is a complex one, but the Theory of Challenge and Threat States in Athletes (TCTSA) identifies three key inter-related areas we might focus on (Jones, Meijen, McCarthy and Sheffield, 2009):

Self-efficacy: belief in one’s own ability or skill to execute a task successfully

Perceived control: acceptance and awareness of factors that are within and outside an individual’s personal control

Approach/avoidance goals: which are closely linked to an individual’s motivation to participate.

Within challenge states, athletes are high in self-efficacy, have a high perception of control and focus on approach goals (play to win). Athletes in a threat state have low self-efficacy, low perceived control and focus on avoidance goals (play to not lose).

Herein lies the absolute need for self-awareness as a high performing athlete: our internal perception of any given external situation determines our body’s stress response to it and ultimately our performance. Perception trumps reality and affects how we perform.

Feel free to submit any questions you might have to alexandriaolton@outlook.com