Ironic and overcompensating processes under avoidance instructions in motor tasks: An attention imbalance model with golf-putting evidence.

Abstract

Thought-suppression research showed, when asked to suppress a given thought (e.g., a white bear), people ironically report thinking more of the suppressed thought. Testing motor performance given avoidance goals (e.g., avoid putting the ball short of the target in golf) represents an interest to transfer thought-suppression findings to motor tasks. However, instead of revealing an ironic process, motor studies showed mixed results, suggesting a coexistence of ironic and overcompensating processes. The present study investigates the coexistence of ironic and overcompensating processes induced by avoidance goals in motor tasks. Adopting a dual-process framework, an attention imbalance model (AIM) was proposed to conceptualize such a coexistence. Four golf-putting experiments were conducted to test the AIM by manipulating the degree of attentional imbalance. Results indicated the factor of attentional imbalance moderates the likelihood between ironic and overcompensating processes in golf putting, and such a moderating effect exists in both between- and within-individual variation of task performance but demands task-specific considerations. In addition, performance feedback confounded the putting performance by reducing the likelihood of overcompensating process. The implications of the AIM are discussed in an extended context of motor performance under avoidance goals and thought suppression.

Effects of control strategies on the activation of unwanted intrusive thoughts in elite athletes.

“…Second, the benefit of acceptance may go beyond mental aspects by enhancing athletes’ motor performance. For instance, in four experiments of golf-putting, Liu et al (2019) showed that ironic and overcompensating motor processes could be elicited by activating avoidance goals in mind prior to movement execution. Given that suppression of choking experiences is likely to cause long-term activation on choking thoughts, Liu et al argued that such activated choking thoughts may serve as triggers for repeated choking experiences, particularly when athletes compete in similar competitive settings under high pressure.…”

“…Such challenging situations frequently give rise to experiences of “choking” under pressure, which is defined as “the occurrence of inferior performance despite individual striving and situational demands for superior performance” (Baumeister, 1984, p. 610). Importantly, the relationship between choking and UITs seems circular: Choking can cause UITs, which can in turn cause further instances of choking (Liu et al, 2019). Surprisingly, research addressing choking under pressure has predominantly focused on the causes of choking but never its aftermath (see Gray, in press).…”