|
Light, powerful wireless systems allow
highly flexible neurovideofeedback™! |
Now featuring Neurovideofeedback--monitoring both the body and the brain!
Twelve types of training
with the Peak Achievement Trainer
|
Peak Achievement Trainer®
Customers Include:
*The Resilience
Institute for Performance Improvement, Pricewaterhouse
Coopers
*David Leadbetter
Golf Academy
* United States
Army's Centers for Enhanced Performance
* United States Olympic Training
Center
* U.S. Office of
Personnel
Management
*
Norwegian Olympic Training Center
* U.S. Army
National Marksmanship Team
* Taiwanese
Olympic Team
*
Top Executives of a Fortune 500 Healthcare Company
* A recent Super Bowl championship
team
* Major League Baseball
star
pitcher
* PGA Tour
Golfers
* Olympic Silver
Medalist
Swimmer
*Professional Strength
and Conditioning Coach
* Boston
University
* Canadian National Olympic Sport
Center, Toronto
* Ernest &Young,
LLP
*Australian
Special Forces
* LGE Performance
Systems
* Penn State
University
* St.
Lawrence University
* Singapore Olympic Sports
Council
* Swing Solutions,
Inc.
* University College, Dublin,
Ireland
* University of
Hawaii
* University of
Madrid
* University of
Nebraska
* University Of North
Texas
* University of
Pittsburgh
* University of Western
Sydney - Australia
* Virginia Tech
* Washington
University,
St. Louis, Missouri
* Wingate Institute of Sports
& Physical Education, Israel
* Numerous
other individual athletes, sport psychologists, schools, companies,
therapists, and the general public
|
| NeuroTek welcomes the IMG Academies in Bradenton, FL to the family of Peak Achievement users:
David Leadbetter Golf Academy
Bollettieri Tennis Academy
IMG Academies Sport Psychology
The Baseball Academy
The Basketball Academy
The Soccer Academy
The Hockey Academy
International Performance Institute(IPI)
|
|
| |
 |
|
| |
Study
shows the Benefits of Peak Achievement
Training and Stress
Management for New Learning |
Dr. Steve Radlo and his
associates compared students from two classes, a stress management
class and an aerobics class (control). The students in the stress
management class were also given 15 sessions of Peak Achievement
Training of 15 minutes duration. A pair of students, one from each
class, were then brought in for competitive testing in a new
situation--underhanded dart throwing,. The data showed that the
stress management and Peak Achievement Training group won 11 of 12
matches, focused better, and threw closer to the bull's eye. The
study was presented at the meeting of the North American Society for
the Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity in
2005:
"Effects of a Stress Management Program
and Biofeedback on Learning in a Competitive
Environment"
Steven J. Radlo, Randy
Hyllegard and Masayuki Yamamoto |
|
| |
Introduction
Often, students learning new motor skills or information in
physical education classes are required to demonstrate achievement
in tests or competitions. During times such as these, it is not
uncommon to see a learner “choke” under pressure and produce
performance not truly indicative of what they are capable of.
Learning how to become optimally ready to perform and effectively
cope with stress are important aspects in the development of
skilled performance of cognitive and motor
tasks.
|
 |
|
| |
During stressful times (e.g.,
competition), the release of extraneous catecholamines and stress
hormones can lead to a loss in concentration and attentional focus,
memory lapses, and high arousal levels (Orlick, 1986; Rotella &
Lerner, 1993; Zaichowsky & Takenaka, 1993).
The use of biofeedback has been shown to be an effective method
for monitoring and regulating arousal. The ability to demonstrate to
the learner his or her stress/tension and concentration levels
before and during performance is extremely enlightening and very
important, practical information. Essentially, this is the role of
biofeedback. One such biofeedback instrument is The Peak Achievement
Trainer (PAT). The PAT is used to provide instantaneous
easy-to-interpret information that can be used by performers as they
freely engage in their activity. Just as important is the fact that
the PAT is portable and user-friendly. Coaches, sport psychologists,
and physical educators from major universities, professional teams,
and the Olympic Training Center have put their stamp of approval on
the validity of the PAT. Many have even used it on the sidelines of
sporting events to help athletes monitor and modify their stress
levels. A unique feature of the PAT is its ability to dissect
attention into two sub-components: arousal and concentration.
Relaxing more intensely inhibits or lowers the amplitude of this
signal. The signal is filtered online and thus allows the coach and
athlete to see and hear when the amplitude of the signal is
approaching an optimal level of arousal. Ideally, individuals should
perform within a frequency of 8-13 Hz, a relaxed yet alert state
known as Alpha. Additionally, another graph on the computer screen
will instantaneously show if the person is in an optimal state of
concentration, measured by the number of 40 Hz spikes.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of
a stress management program and the use of biofeedback on skill
acquisition during competition. The task participants will learn is
underhand dart throwing. Stress will be induced by using monetary
incentives and head-to-head competition. It is hypothesized that
participants engaged in the 15-week stress management program and
using the PAT will perform with greater accuracy and consistency and
spend a significantly greater proportion of their time in alpha (a
measure of arousal) and produce a greater proportion of 40 Hz
activity (a measure of focused concentration) than their control
counterparts.
|
|
| |
Method
Participants
University students (N=24) volunteered to participate in the
study. Half of these participants were randomly drawn from stress
management classes and served as the experimental group. The other
half were randomly drawn from personal fitness classes and served as
the control group. All students were asked to read and sign an
informed consent during the first day. Participants in the stress
management group, aside from taking the 15-week stress management
class, were also engaged in 15 min of biofeedback using the PAT per
week.
Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-II (CSAI-II)
The Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-II (Martens, et al.,
1990) was administered to all participants before they engaged in
the motor task and midway through competition. The CSAI-II is a
multi-dimensional scale that is believed to assess somatic anxiety,
cognitive anxiety, and state self-confidence. The scale consists of
27 questions (three nine-item subscales) arranged on a four-point
Likert scale.
Motor Task
Underhand dart throwing was the task used to determine the
effectiveness of the stress management protocol and the biofeedback.
Having participants perform this type of novel task ensured that all
participants were equal in their motor ability. Standard darts
weighing approximately 10 g and 12 cm long, were used and the dart
board painted with a white background and black vertical (9) and
horizontal (9) lines painted over top to form a grid. Each line was
5 cm apart and numbered 1-9 (+ or - depending on the x,y coordinate
location). A masking tape line was placed on the floor approximately
365 cm (10 ft) from the dart board. Participants were asked to stand
behind this line when throwing. Throws were made underhanded at a
dart board located 91.44 cm (5 ft) above the floor.
Procedures
On the day of testing, two participants (one experimental, one
control) were led to the Human Performance Laboratory at Western
Illinois University. The participants were told that they would be
competing against each other (both participants were of the same
gender). The participants were informed that if their score was
better than their opponent, then they would win $20, to be paid that
day. Furthermore, if they hit the bull’s eye twice in a row they
would receive $10 for each time they did so. Additionally, all
winners’ names were put in a drawing for a $300 cash prize to be
awarded after testing was completed. The participants then complete
the CSAI-II. Upon completing the questionnaire, the
participant-to-be-tested put the PAT headware on, while the other
not-to-be-tested participant put on a similar, non-functional cap.
After 6 practice throws, the not-to-be-tested participant threw
his/her 3 darts first, followed by the to-be-tested participant.
Scores were recorded and reported to the participants after each
trial block. 15 blocks of 3 throws were completed for a total of 45
throws for each participant. Testing time was approximately 30 min.
Once testing was completed, the participants were debriefed about
the experiment and any questions they may have were answered.
|
|
| |
Results
CSAI-II
The pretest/posttest scores for the three sub-scales, cognitive
anxiety, somatic anxiety, and self-confidence, were analyzed using a
repeated measures, MANOVA with Groups (Stress Management/Biofeedback
(SM), Control (C)) as a between-subjects factor and Pretest/Protest
as the repeated measures. The multivariate test for the Groups x
Pretest/Posttest interaction was significant, Wilks’ λ = .27, F(1,
23) = 32.36, p<.001, η² = .73. Examination of the univariate
F-tests showed that this interaction was significant for all three
sub-scale categories, cognitive anxiety, F(1,23) = 41.90, p<.001,
somatic anxiety, F(1,23) = 44.13, p<.001, and self-confidence,
F(1, 23) = 30.71, p<.001. Simple effects conducted for the Groups
x Pretest/Posttest interaction revealed that for the cognitive
anxiety items, participants in the C condition rated themselves
higher (M = 22.5, SD = 2.89) than participants in the SM condition
(M = 18.35, SD = 2.23) for the posttest. For the somatic anxiety
questions, dart throwers in the C group scored higher (M = 24.2, SD
= 3.75) than those in the SM group (M = 18.8, SD = 1.99) for the
posttest. Finally, for the self-confidence items, C participants
perceived themselves as less confident (M = 21.1, SD = 2.15) than
the SM participants (M = 24.00, SD = 1.75).
Performance Scores
A paired-samples T-test was used to analyze performance
differences (absolute error) between the SM and C group. The test
showed the two groups were significantly different, t(11) = -2.69,
p<.05. The SM group was more accurate (M = 5.49, SEM = .34) than
the C group (M = 6.29, SEM = .31). See Figure 1. With regard to
head-to-head competition, the SM group defeated the C group 11-1.
Furthermore, the amount of time participants spent in optimal
concentration (5 s before each dart throw) showed that the SM group
spent 71% of their time optimally concentrating as opposed to the C
group, which spent 55% of their time concentrating optimally.
|
|
| |
| Comparison of the Absolute Error
Scores |
Comparison of Concentration
Times |
 |
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Discussion
Overall, findings suggest that individuals learning a self-paced
motor task during stressful situations will experience performance
benefits when using a stress management program and the Peak
Achievement Trainer (PAT). Oftentimes, students in a physical
education class or youngsters learning a novel sport skill will be
asked to perform that skill in front of others or in
competition-like situations. It is not uncommon to see individuals
in “pressure” situations such as these “choke” and produce sub-par
performances. Learning theorists propose that this is so because
stress, coupled with the early stages of learning, decreases
attentional capacity and focus, while at the same time increasing
nervousness and memory lapses (Fitts & Posner, 1967; Maxwell,
Masters & Eves, 2000). In extreme cases, if an individual is
faced with competitive, stressful situations on a relatively
frequent basis, the effects of these stressors could become
debilitating and cause the individual to quit or drop out of the
sport or activity (Anderson & Cole, 2001; Brustad, 1993; Cox,
2002; Smith, 1986).
One reason for why it is believed that the stress management
program was effective was in the preperformance routine that was
taught. Participants using the stress management program were taught
to perform with a “quiet” mind, minimizing internal and external
distractors. This approach has been professed in Singer’s (2002)
Five-Step Strategy and has been shown to have a great deal of
success in the learning and enhancement of self-paced motor
activities. Other elements of the stress management program likely
play a role in enhancing the learning of a novel skill such as
underhand dart throwing. Participants were taught what stress is and
how to identify it, as well as coping strategies. Techniques such as
general meditation, diaphragmatic breathing, imagery, autogenic
training, progressive muscular relaxation, positive self-talk, and
cognitive restructuring likely contributed to the superior
performance exhibited by the SM group. These participants were also
taught a specific preperformance routine to help them be in an
optimal ready state and focused on the task at hand.
Along with the stress management program, students were trained
using the PAT biofeedback instrument. Biofeedback demonstrates to
the learner his or her current stress, tension, and concentration
levels before and during performance. These processes are typically
subconscious, thus performers are able to recognize when their
arousal levels are too high or when concentration is not at a
premium. Through weekly sessions of PAT training, participants were
able to recognize, understand, and consequently moderate their
arousal and concentration skills using the techniques taught in the
stress management class. The PAT helped the participants in the SM
group to perform in a relaxed, yet alert state, and in a focused
manner. SM participants were able to maintain concentration levels
for a longer period of time during the 5 s before dart throw than
the C group.
In summary, exploring effective stress management interventions
could combat potential deleterious effects imposed by competitive
pressure by mentally and physically tuning the performer to respond
with a quiet, ready mind. This state of readiness would minimize the
cognitive processing of irrelevant information and distractors at
the time of motor initiation, processing that would essentially
degrade performance and is more characteristic of beginners
(Petruzzello, Landers, & Salazar, 1991). Furthermore, results of
this study showed that combining a stress management protocol with
biofeedback appeared to enhance the learning of a self-paced motor
skill. Ultimately, this research will contribute to understanding
the relationship between competitive stress and human performance.
|
|
| References
Anderson, E.D., & Cole, B.S. (2001). Stress factors related
to reported academic performance and burnout. Education, 108(4),
497-503.
Brustad, R.J. (1993). Youth in sport: Psychological
considerations. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L.K. Tennant
(Eds.), Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 695-717). New
York: Macmillan.
Cox, R.H. (2002). Sport psychology: Concepts and applications.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fitts, P.M., & Posner, M.I. (1967). Human Performance.
Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Martens, R., Burton, D., Vealey, R.S., Bump, L.A., & Smith,
D.E. (1990). Development and validation of the competitive state
anxiety inventory-2. In R. Martens, R.S. Vealey, & D. Burton
(Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport (pp. 117-232). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Maxwell, J.P., Masters, R.W., & Eves, F.F. (2000). From
novice to know-how: A longitudinal study of implicit motor learning.
Journal of Sport Sciences, 18, 111-120.
Orlick, T.(1986). Psyching for sport. Champaign, IL: Leisure
Press.
Petruzzello, S.J., Landers, D.M., & Salazar, W. (1991).
Biofeedback and sport/exercise performance: Applications and
limitations. Behavior Therapy, 22, 379-392.
Rotella, R.J., & Lerner, J.D. (1993). Responding to
competitive pressure. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L.K. Tennant
(Eds.), Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 528-541). New
York: Macmillan.
Singer, R.N. (2002). Preperformance state, routines, and
automaticity: What does it take to realize expertise in self-paced
events? Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24, 359-375.
Smith, R.E. (1986). Toward a cognitive-affective model of
athletic burnout. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 36-50.
Zaichkowsky, L.D., & Takenaka, K. (1993). Optimizing arousal
levels. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L.K. Tennant (Eds.),
Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 511-527). New York:
Macmillan.
|
|
|
