EXPLANATORY MODELS OF STRESS

Criticism of the inverted U theory

Historically, the relationship between arousal and performance was explained by the "inverted U" hypothesis.

This theory suggests that performance improves as arousal increases up to an optimal point, after which, if arousal continues to rise, performance gradually declines in a symmetrical fashion.

However, this model has been criticized for being overly simplistic, as it does not differentiate between different types of anxiety nor does it account for the sudden collapses that occur in high performance. The limitation of this model lies in its unidimensionality.

It does not take into account that the cognitive interpretation of arousal varies between individuals.

For example, an Olympic weightlifter needs extremely high levels of activation for a maximal lift, levels that according to inverted U might be considered excessive and detrimental to other tasks.

Assuming that there is a single ideal midpoint for all athletes and situations ignores the complexity of mind-body interaction under stress.

The catastrophe model and the drop in performance under high pressure.

To overcome the limitations of the inverted U, the cusp catastrophe model emerged.

This model proposes a three-dimensional interaction between cognitive anxiety, physiological arousal, and performance.

It postulates that when cognitive anxiety (mental worry) is low, performance follows the inverted U curve: a little physical activation helps.

However, when cognitive anxiety is high, an increase in physiological activation beyond the optimal point does not cause a gradual drop, but a dramatic and sudden collapse in performance: the "catastrophe". A clear example is seen in archery.

If an archer is physically activated (high pulse) but mentally calm, he can channel that energy.

But if that same archer begins to doubt himself (high cognitive anxiety) and his heart races, he will not experience a slight decrease in his aim; he is likely to suffer a total failure of technique, sending the arrow off target entirely.

Once this catastrophe occurs, the athlete must drastically reduce his activation levels to "reset" his system before he can regain his previous level of performance.

Summary

The classical inverted U theory has been criticized for its simplism, as it does not differentiate types of anxiety nor does it explain sudden collapses in competition.

The catastrophe model proposes a three-dimensional interaction. It postulates that, with high cognitive anxiety, an increase in physiological activation does not improve performance, but causes a collapse.

This dramatic and sudden failure, known as catastrophe, occurs when the mind hesitates and the body speeds up, requiring a drastic reduction in activation to recover.