1. In your own words, briefly describe how the Individualized Zones of Optimal Functioning relates arousal and performance.
a. The most accepted account in sports psychology for the relationship between arousal and performance is the model of Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning (Hanin, 2000). IZOF hypothesis that there are personal characteristics that causes a variety of people to react differently to anxiety. For example, some tend to succeed when anxiety is low while others tend to succeed when anxiety is high.
2. What are the potential issues with the theory?
a. The main criticism of the Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning model is that it does not explain why some people perform better in certain emotional states. For example, …show more content…
According to the article, how does IZOF describe inter-individual variability?
a. The article describes inter-individual variability as the optimal emotion intensity and content. A high degree of inter-individual variability is expected when the intensity is high and the individual has dysfunctional emotions accompanying their success. Thus, different athletes can perform up to their potential experiencing emotions of different content and intensity. Optimal emotional states (positive and negative) reflect (a) individual differences in the level of available resources, (b) athletes' ability to recruit and utilize efficiently these resources, and (c) athletes' individual coping strategies to compensate for a lack of or insufficient resources (low readiness for competition).
4. In your own words, what is the purpose of the study?
a. The purpose of this study was to use the Individual Zone of Optimal Functioning to examine the effectiveness of the model in highly skilled and experienced athletes.
5. What were the total number of participants included in the study? Of this number, how many were men and how many were …show more content…
The bodily symptoms list, containing 45 descriptors of pleasant and unpleasant bodily experiences concomitant with performance emotions, was developed and applied in a sample of referees and athletes (Bortoli & Robazza, 2002; Robazza & Bortoli, 2003). Examples: “relaxed muscles”, “regular breathing”, and for movements, “vigorous”, “energetic”, and “smooth.” The most often identi- fied facilitating-negative terms were those relating to “muscular tension”, “sweating”, “stomach butterflies”, “stomach tension”, and “accelerated heart rate”. Inhibiting-negative terms were ones of “physical exhaustion”, “loose legs”, “stiff movements”, “back pain”, and “headache”, while inhibiting-positive ones were “relaxed muscles”, “slow movements”, “yawns”, “feeling fresh”, (not “sweaty”), and “loose legs”.
c. Borg Category Ratio Scaled: The scale has been used in psychological studies of exercise capacity, exertion, or pain (Borg, 2001). The verbal anchors of the scale were 0 = nothing at all, 0.5 = very, very little, 1 = very little, 2 = little, 3 = moderately, 5 = much, 7 = very much, 10 = very, very much, • = maximal possible (no verbal anchors were used for 4, 6, 8 and 9). Single item scores may range from 0 to 11. The scale allows one to make ratio comparisons on intensity ratings and to determine the magnitude of direct
a. The most accepted account in sports psychology for the relationship between arousal and performance is the model of Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning (Hanin, 2000). IZOF hypothesis that there are personal characteristics that causes a variety of people to react differently to anxiety. For example, some tend to succeed when anxiety is low while others tend to succeed when anxiety is high.
2. What are the potential issues with the theory?
a. The main criticism of the Individual Zones of Optimal Functioning model is that it does not explain why some people perform better in certain emotional states. For example, …show more content…
According to the article, how does IZOF describe inter-individual variability?
a. The article describes inter-individual variability as the optimal emotion intensity and content. A high degree of inter-individual variability is expected when the intensity is high and the individual has dysfunctional emotions accompanying their success. Thus, different athletes can perform up to their potential experiencing emotions of different content and intensity. Optimal emotional states (positive and negative) reflect (a) individual differences in the level of available resources, (b) athletes' ability to recruit and utilize efficiently these resources, and (c) athletes' individual coping strategies to compensate for a lack of or insufficient resources (low readiness for competition).
4. In your own words, what is the purpose of the study?
a. The purpose of this study was to use the Individual Zone of Optimal Functioning to examine the effectiveness of the model in highly skilled and experienced athletes.
5. What were the total number of participants included in the study? Of this number, how many were men and how many were …show more content…
The bodily symptoms list, containing 45 descriptors of pleasant and unpleasant bodily experiences concomitant with performance emotions, was developed and applied in a sample of referees and athletes (Bortoli & Robazza, 2002; Robazza & Bortoli, 2003). Examples: “relaxed muscles”, “regular breathing”, and for movements, “vigorous”, “energetic”, and “smooth.” The most often identi- fied facilitating-negative terms were those relating to “muscular tension”, “sweating”, “stomach butterflies”, “stomach tension”, and “accelerated heart rate”. Inhibiting-negative terms were ones of “physical exhaustion”, “loose legs”, “stiff movements”, “back pain”, and “headache”, while inhibiting-positive ones were “relaxed muscles”, “slow movements”, “yawns”, “feeling fresh”, (not “sweaty”), and “loose legs”.
c. Borg Category Ratio Scaled: The scale has been used in psychological studies of exercise capacity, exertion, or pain (Borg, 2001). The verbal anchors of the scale were 0 = nothing at all, 0.5 = very, very little, 1 = very little, 2 = little, 3 = moderately, 5 = much, 7 = very much, 10 = very, very much, • = maximal possible (no verbal anchors were used for 4, 6, 8 and 9). Single item scores may range from 0 to 11. The scale allows one to make ratio comparisons on intensity ratings and to determine the magnitude of direct