Choking under pressure: The effect of skill level and type of pressure on performance of soccer dribbling skill.

Document Type : Research Paper


1 MSc, Motor Behavior Department, Sport Sciences Faculty, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Motor Behavior Department, Sport Sciences Faculty, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

3 Professor, Motor Behavior Department, Sport Sciences Faculty, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran


The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of skill level on the performance of dribbling skills in soccer choking under pressure conditions. For this purpose, 20 skilled players of the university football team and twenty beginner students in football (with age range 18-25) participated in the study. The Egilly soccer dribble skill test was performed in two stages: without pressure condition and combined pressure condition. In the present study, the combination of two types of pressure, competition between participants and camcorders were used to create pressure condition. In order to ensure that the pressure conditions were applied, the level of competitive anxiety was measured using the second version of the competitive state anxiety and the heart rate of the participants. To analyze the data, repeated measures analysis of variance was used for comparing the mean scores and independent t-test was used to compare the mean scores of two groups without pressure condition. The results showed that the performance of the skilled group, decrease under pressure conditions and the performance of the beginner group improved under pressure conditions. It is possible that the pressure conditions in the beginner group would increase the effort to perform better and thus improve performance. It can also be said that the motivational role of pressure conditions has improved performance in beginners. In skilled persons, they are also likely to engage in skill-centered mechanisms that give less skill to the source of attention which is empirically evident in verifying the explicit review theory.


1. Baumeister RF, Showers CJ. A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests. European Journal of Social Psychology. 1986;16(4):361-83.
2. Salehi H, Yazdanparast F. Choking under Pressure in the performance of a tennis court: An explanation based on the needs of attention. Master's thesis, (in persian). University of Isfahan, 2015.
3. Carver CS, Scheier MF. Attention and self-regulation: A control-theory approach to human behavior: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
4. Wine J. Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychological bulletin. 1971;76(2):92.
5. DeCaro MS, Thomas RD, Albert NB, Beilock SL. Choking under pressure: multiple routes to skill failure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2011;140(3):390.
6. Eysenck MW, Calvo MG. Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition & Emotion. 1992;6(6):409-34.
7. Salehi H, Hamsi M. Movahedi A. Reducing the sources of attention and improving the function under pressure in a sensory-motor function. Master's thesis, (in persian). Isfahan University, 2013.
8. Beilock SL, Carr TH. On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs choking under pressure? Journal of experimental psychology: General. 2001;130(4):701.
9. Lewis BP, Linder DE. Thinking about choking? Attentional processes and paradoxical performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1997;23(9):937-44.
10. Baumeister RF. Choking under pressure: self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1984;46(3):610.
11. Beilock SL, Bertenthal BI, McCoy AM, Carr TH. Haste does not always make waste: Expertise, direction of attention, and speed versus accuracy in performing sensorimotor skills. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2004;11(2):373-9.
12. Masters RS. Knowledge, knerves and know‐how: The role of explicit versus implicit knowledge in the breakdown of a complex motor skill under pressure. British journal of psychology. 1992;83(3):343-58.
13. Otten M. Choking vs. clutch performance: A study of sport performance under pressure. Journal of sport and exercise psychology. 2009;31(5):583-601.
14. Wong EH, Lox CL, Clark SE. Relation between sports context,  competitive trait anxiety, perceived ability, and self-presentation confidence. Perceptual and motor skills. 1993;76(3):847-50.
15. Beilock SL, Carr TH, MacMahon C, Starkes JL. When paying attention becomes counterproductive: impact of divided versus skill-focused attention on novice and experienced performance of sensorimotor skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2002;8(1):6.
16. Tanaka Y, Sekiya H. The influence of audience and monetary reward on the putting kinematics of expert and novice golfers. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2010;81(4):416-24.
17. Salehi H, Hamsi M. Movahedi A. Reducing the sources of attention and improving the underlying effect in a sensory-motor function. (in persian). Journal of motor behavior 2013; (13): 109-124.
18. Martens R, Vealey RS, Burton D. Competitive anxiety in sport: Human kinetics; 1990.
19.  Mojtahedi H. Evaluation and Measurement in Physical Education. (in persian). 2008.
20. Ghandadi A, Movahedi A, Safavi Sh. Competition as a component for the hypothesis of the practice of exercising in the implementation of selected football skills. Master's thesis, (in persian). University of Isfahan, 2011.
21. Zahedi H, Shojahie M, Sadeghi H. Effect of focus of attention and skill level on basketball freethrow shot under psychological pressure. World Applied Sciences Journal. 2011;13(5):1047-52.
22. Reeves JL. Attention and performance: When does choking under pressure occur and what is the debilitating source? 2005.
23. Easterbrook JA. The effect of emotion on cue utilization and the organization of behavior. Psychological review. 1959;66(3):183.
24. Tanaka Y, Sekiya H. The influence of monetary reward and punishment on psychological, physiological, behavioral and performance aspects of a golf putting task. Human movement science. 2011;30(6):1115-28.
25. Salehi H, Yazdanparast F. Choking under Pressure in the performance of a tennis court: An explanation based on the needs of attention. (in persian). Research in sport management and motor behavior. 2015; (26): 15-26.
26. Ghasemian Moghadam M, Taheri H. Effect of Attention Definition on the Performance of Table Tennis Players in an Position under perssure. (in persian). Publication Growth and Motor Learning. 2015; 6 (4): 475-91.
27. Moein F, Zahedi H. Meshkati Z. The effect of the relevant and irrelevant focus and skill level on the accuracy of volleyball tennis service under stress conditions. (in persian). Motor behavior 2014; 6 (17): 105-18.
28. Koedijker JM, Poolton JM, Maxwell JP, Oudejans RR, Beek PJ, Masters RS. Attention and time constraints in perceptual-motor learning and performance: Instruction, analogy, and skill level. Consciousness and cognition. 2011;20(2):245-56.
29. Gucciardi DF, Dimmock JA. Choking under pressure in sensorimotor skills: Conscious processing or depleted attentional resources? Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2008;9(1):45-59.
30. Ford P, Hodges NJ, Williams AM. Online attentional-focus manipulations in a soccer-dribbling task: Implications for the proceduralization of motor skills. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2005;37(5):386-94.
31. Gray R. Attending to the execution of a complex sensorimotor skill: expertise differences, choking, and slumps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2004. 10(1); 42.
32. Ezell EJ. Choking in Highly Experienced Soccer Players: University of North Carolina at Greensboro; 2012.
33. Salvador A, Suay F, Gonzalez-Bono E, Serrano MA. Anticipatory cortisol, testosterone and psychological responses to judo competition in young men. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2003;28(3):364-75.
34. Mullen R, Hardy L, Tattersall A. The effects of anxiety on motor performance: A test of the conscious processing hypothesis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2005;27(2):212-25.
35. Cooke A, Kavussanu M, McIntyre D, Boardley ID, Ring C. Effects of competitive pressure on expert performance: Underlying psychological, physiological, and kinematic mechanisms. Psychophysiology. 2011;48(8):1146-56.
36. Cotterill S. Pre-performance routines in sport: Current understanding and future directions. International review of sport and exercise psychology. 2010;3(2):132-53.
37. Cox RH, Martens MP, Russell WD. Measuring anxiety in athletics: the revised competitive state anxiety inventory .Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2003;25(4):519-33.
38. Baumeister RF, Steinhilber A. Paradoxical effects of supportive audiences on performance under pressure: The home field disadvantage in sports championships. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1984;47(1):85.
39. Eysenck MW, Derakshan N, Santos R, Calvo MG. Anxiety and cognitive performance: attentional control theory. Emotion. 2007;7(2):336.
40. Wilson M, Smith NC, Chattington M, Ford M, Marple-Horvat DE. The role of effort in moderating the anxiety–performance relationship: Testing the prediction of processing efficiency theory in simulated rally driving. Journal of sports sciences. 2006;24(11):1223-33.
41. Williams AM, Vickers J, Rodrigues S. The effects of anxiety on visual search, movement kinematics, and performance in table tennis: A test of Eysenck and Calvo’s processing efficiency theory. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2002;24(4):438-55.
42. Fitts PM, Posner MI. Human performance. 1967.