Textbook Notes (368,295)
Canada (161,777)
Psychology (4,889)
Chapter 4

Chapter 4 Lecture Notes- Sports Psychology

5 Pages
139 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
Psychology 2990A/B
Professor
Doug Hazlewood
Semester
Winter

Description
FEBRUARY 11, 2013: Psychology Applied to Sports Ch.4: Sport Psychology Interventions Today’s Lecture Behaviour in Groups 1. Social facilitation (the more presence of others) 2. Social loafing (many hands light work) 3. Group cohesion (the glue that binds us) *no lecture 3 material Prologue: What is a Group? Three definitions (types of groups): 1. Two or more people in the same place at the same time (eg. strangers waiting for a bus) -no interaction or communication -an aggregate or collective (a non-social group) 2. Two or more people who influence each other (not much interaction or comm.) -a “minimal group” (eg. the wave at baseball game, singing the national anthem at a game) -NOT minimal influence, minimal INTERACTION/COMMUNICATION 3. A “social group”: two or more people who influence each other through social interaction -interact, communicate, make decisions, have mutual goals Part 1: Social Facilitation – How are we influenced by the mere presence of others? A. Norman Triplett (1898) -discovered that cyclists who competed with each other were faster than cyclists who competed alone -thus, the presence of others facilitates performance? -STUDY: two children – coacting fishing wheel (kids wind string faster in the presence of other kids who were winding string than when they were alone) Why? -the presence of others releases extra energy (“dynamogism”) that facilitates perfmance B. Establishing the generality of the facilitation effect. Occurs when: -“coactors” (who perform the same task) -others who are merely present (an audience) -other physical tasks (eg. lifting weights; shoot pool) -cognitive tasks (simple math problems, learning word associations, naming colours) -people even write their signature faster when others are present -BUT, sometimes the presence of others inhibits performance (class presentation) C. Zajonc (Zci-ence) 1965 and the Yerkes-Dodson Law -“Physiological arousal facilitates the dominant response” -“dominant” response  the “most likely” response you would make (ie. 2+2=4) -on easy tasks, the dominant response is usually the correct response -arousal should facilitate performance on difficult tasks, the dominant response is usually incorrect -arousal should inhibit performance -the presence of others is a source of physical arousal: should facilitate performance on easy tasks and inhibit performance on difficult tasks  The Social Facilitation Effect A Research example: Pool Players (% of shots) Alone Audience Experienced 70% 80% Novice 36% 25% A review of 241 studies involving almost 24,000 participants: The social facilitation effect is real. D. Why is the presence of others arousing? 1. Evaluation Apprehension (others make us anxious because they might be evaluating us) -if they’re blind folded (can’t evaluate us), social facilitation is less likely 2. Others are distracting (creates arousal) Why? -we experience “attentional conflict” (focus on “audience” or “task”?  arousal) -non-social stimuli (loud noises, flashing lights) show same effect as presence of others. There’s nothing uniquely “social” about social facilitation 3. [Zajonc] The mere presence of others makes us more “alert” (or “vigilant”), because they might do something that we have to respond to. This “alertness” produces arousal (which facilitates the dominant response)  the “cockroach study” – Alone,Easy 40 sec. Difficult 110 sec. Audience, Easy Part 2: Social Loafing – Groups working together to achieve a mutual goal Additive Tasks: The group’s achievement depends on the sum of individual contributions -eg. a tug-of-war team: group’s achievement (how hard group pulls) depends on sum of individual contributions (how hard each individual pulls) -8 people will exert 8 times as much pull on the rope as a single individual? Ringerlmann’s (1913) rope –a pulling study Number Pulling Group Output Ind. Output 1 person 63 kg 63 kg 2 people 120 kg 60 kg 3 people 158 kg 53 kg 8 people 248 kg 31 kg 8 x 63 = 504 kg  “Coordination Loss” (each person pulls as hard as he can, but not all are pulling at exactly the same t
More Less

Related notes for Psychology 2990A/B

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit