Interpretation of Emotional State and Temporal Patterning of Emotions

In addition to the conceptualisation of emotions as positive or negative, the interpretation and temporal patterning of emotions also play a role in challenge and threat states. The interpretation of emotions has gained increased attention over the last decade and is thought to influence challenge and threat states. How an individual interprets emotions directs their behaviours (e.g. Lazarus, 1999; 2000b). Although emotions are defined as being positive and negative, this does not mean that a negative emotion only influences performance negatively, or that a positive emotion only affects performance positively

(Hanton, Neil, & Mellalieu, 2008; G. Jones, 1995; Mellalieu, Hanton, &

Fletcher, 2006). G. Jones (1995) introduced the control model of debilitative and facilitative competitive state anxiety and suggested that athletes can interpret their emotional responses to an upcoming competition as helpful or unhelpful to performance. He stated that an athlete‟s perceived control over the environment and the self, a positive belief to cope, and the belief that the goal can be achieved can create a positive interpretation of anxiety symptoms.

Individual differences are evident in the way athletes perceive anxiety; some athletes can interpret anxiety as a negative feeling that hamper their performance, whereas other athletes interpret anxiety as a positive feeling about their performance. Burton and Naylor (1997) noted that defining anxiety as facilitative might confuse anxiety with other more positive emotions and that perhaps other positive emotions are measured as facilitative anxiety. M. V. Jones

and Uphill (2004) noted, however, that although participants may experience the same emotion, their interpretation of these symptoms as helpful or unhelpful for performance only relate to the individual‟s belief of how the symptoms relating to a specific emotion might affect sport performance for that individual.

If interpreting a particular emotion as helpful towards performance can change the appraisals of athletes, this is worth examining because it may

influence challenge and threat states and performance. That it is worth examining is also demonstrated in the increasing amount of attention that research on the direction of emotions has received over the last decade or so (for a review, see Hanton et al., 2008). In addition, sport psychologists can use tools such as imagery to help athletes to interpret anxiety symptoms as helpful rather than unhelpful for performance (Cumming, Olphin, & Law, 2007; Hale &

Whitehouse, 1998). Hale and Whitehouse found that participants interpreted somatic and cognitive anxiety as more helpful when imaging taking a penalty kick whilst the word challenge was given during the task instructions than when the word pressure was given as part of the instructions. Cumming et al. examined the influence of imagery scripts on the interpretation of cognitive and somatic anxiety as helpful or unhelpful. They found that after anxiety imagery scripts the participants experienced the symptoms of cognitive and somatic anxiety as more unhelpful compared to other imagery scripts. This indicates that imagery scripts can influence the perception of anxiety as being helpful or unhelpful for

performance.

Skinner and Brewer (2004) suggested that activation levels of emotions also play a role in performance. It is suggested that high activation positive emotions (e.g. excitement) facilitate motivation and effort, which in turn may

benefit training and preparation. Low activation positive emotions (e.g.

contentment) are thought to facilitate effective concentration on the task and as a consequence, low activation positive emotions may be most beneficial

immediately before performance (Skinner & Brewer, 2004). This may, however, depend on the task and its requirements, as the 100m sprint might require

different levels of activation positive emotions than a shooting competition. This is also found in research examining individual zones of optimal functioning (IZOF; Hanin, 2000). The IZOF model states that athletes have an optimal zone of emotions in which they experience their best performance. This optimal zone is different for each athlete. Support has been provided for the IZOF (e.g. Robazza, Pellizzari, Bertollo, & Hanin, 2008).

The timing of emotions can have an influence on its interpretation; when anxiety occurs before competition, it is more often appraised as positive, whereas during competition it is appraised as negative and interfering with performance (Burton & Naylor, 1997, Lazarus, 1991). In one of the few studies examining cognitive anxiety both pre- and during competition, Smith, Bellamy, Collins, and Newell (2001) examined cognitive anxiety in volleyball players during one season. They found that the score in the game influenced levels of cognitive anxiety, high trait anxious individuals scored higher on cognitive anxiety when the game was tied or when they were trailing. Preparatory anxiety is thought to have a motivational effect before a task (Eysenck & Calvo, 1992). The concerns about competition may cause an athlete to gather all perceived available

resources to cope with the demands and concerns about competition. However, if an athlete experiences anxiety during the competition, this can turn in to threat, especially when he/she is high trait anxious and is tied or trailing in competition

(Smith et al., 2001); when an athlete experiences concerns during the competition or just before, this might interfere with the available coping resources (Burton & Naylor, 1997) and the athlete might perceive less control over the outcome of the competition (Smith et al., 2001). These are speculations, and a more holistic approach including physiological measures of challenge and threat and measures of self-efficacy, control, and achievement goals could be used to examine if athletes experience changes in resources during competition when they experience higher levels of anxiety. In addition, individuals may switch between challenge and threat appraisals and experience multiple emotions during sport performance (Lazarus, 1999).

The causal relation between challenge and threat appraisals and emotions is unclear. It is not only the interpretation of emotions that has an influence on performance, but also the interpretation of the person-situation relation, where physiological arousal symptoms are often used as a source of information, as a challenge or threat. Emotions are usually measured retrospectively, which adds to the difficulty of measuring causality. In addition, the effect on performance is not universal across sports (Woodman et al., 2009), tasks requiring fine motor control probably do not benefit from high levels of physiological arousal (e.g. Noteboom, Fleshner, & Enoka, 2001; Parfitt, Jones, & Hardy, 1990). It is argued that during a performance episode, an athlete can switch from challenge to threat appraisals, and vice versa (Lazarus, 1999). Cerin (2003) suggested that athletes can appraise a situation as both challenge and threat or demonstrate

characteristics indicative of a dual challenge/threat appraisals style. For example, an athlete can be high in cognitive anxiety, but could still approach the

Skinner and Brewer suggested that because a dual challenge/threat appraisal style raises the stakes associated with competition, this can benefit the athlete in terms of enhanced motivation compared to threat or challenge appraisals alone.

However, it is unknown whether an athlete can experience challenge and threat states simultaneously and how this may influence cardiovascular responses.