Australian Psychologist, June 2010; 45(2): 132140

Emotions in sport: Perceived effects on attention, concentration, and

performance

ROBYN LOUISE VAST1, ROBYN LOUISE YOUNG1, & PATRICK ROBERT THOMAS2
1

School of Psychology, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia and 2School of Education and Professional Studies,
Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Abstract
This study explored attentional patterns associated with positive and negative emotions during sport competition, and
athletes perceptions of the consequences of these attentional changes for concentration and performance. Sixty-nine athletes
completed the Sport Emotion Questionnaire following a national softball competition. They also retrospectively reported
their perceptions of how emotions influenced their attention, concentration, and sport performance. Excitement and
happiness were more closely associated with concentration than anxiety, dejection, and anger. Although excitement
demanded more attention than the negative emotions, the positive emotions were perceived as more likely to lead to a
performance-relevant focus and automatic physical movements, both of which were beneficial for concentration and
performance. Emotional intensity increased these effects.

Key words: Attention and perception, emotion, mood, sport and exercise psychology.

Research investigating the effect of emotions on

sports performance has predominantly explored the
role of pre-competition emotions, the implications of
attributions for success and failure on post-competition emotions (McAuley & Duncan, 1990), or long
range retrospective accounts of the emotions associated with all time best or worst performances
(Krane & Williams, 2006; Orlick & Partington,
1988). Very little research has investigated the effect
of emotions occurring during a competition on
attention and unfolding performance (Seve, Ria,
Poizat, Saury, & Durand, 2007). The aim of this
study was to explore retrospectively the emotions
that occurred during a sporting competition, athlete
perceptions of their immediate effects on attention,
and self-reports of the consequences of these changes
for ongoing concentration and performance.
One way in which emotions can influence sporting
behaviours and actions is through their effect on
attention, and therefore concentration (Lazarus,
2000; Matthews & Wells, 1999). Attention involves
selectively focusing on one source of information
while excluding others (Smith, 1996). Due to the
limited capacity of the information processing

system, screening out cues that interfere with

performance and attending to facilitating cues (i.e.,
good concentration) consistently results in better
performance (Smith, 1996). This requires a prioritisation of available information, a process intricately
linked to motivational and adaptational factors
including ones emotional state (Anderson, 2005;
Derryberry & Tucker, 1994; Lang, 2000; Yantis &
Johnson, 1990).
The emphasis in existing literature exploring how
emotions may influence attention and performance
lies with anxiety. Contemporary theory suggests
that under some circumstances, namely, when selfefficacy is high and somatic anxiety or physiological
arousal is low, anxiety can be facilitative to attention
and performance (Eysenck & Calvo, 1992; Hardy,
1990). Furthermore, research has also suggested that
anxiety may be useful in directing movement away
from threats, thus encouraging athletes to engage
in behaviour to avoid failure (Carver, 2001, 2004;
Tamir, Chiu, & Gross, 2007). A large body of
research, however, has also emphasised the deleterious effects of anxiety on attention. This research has
suggested that anxiety leads to negative attentional

Correspondence: Ms R. L. Vast, School of Psychology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia. E-mail: robyn.vast@flinders.edu.au
ISSN 0005-0067 print/ISSN 1742-9544 online The Australian Psychological Society Ltd
Published by Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/00050060903261538

Emotion and attention in sport

biases. Anxiety directs attention towards threatening
stimuli over neutral and positive stimuli, independently of their relevance to a task or visual location
(Hansen & Hansen, 1994; Jones, 2003; Ohman,
Flykt, & Esteves, 2001). It is argued that this occurs
as a reflection of the importance of detecting negative
stimuli for decisive action, developing coping strategies, safety and survival (Schimmack & Derryberry,
2005).
Following the identification of negative environmental stimuli, the attentional field has been shown
to narrow on the threat, decreasing ability to detect
and respond to peripheral stimuli (Boutcher, 2002;
Derryberry & Tucker, 1994; Easterbrook, 1959).
Cognitive activity also increases with anxiety and
information processing becomes extensive and prolonged; expressed in the form of worry and rumination (Anderson, 2005; Gross, 1998). Attention is
also often oriented internally toward thoughts,
feelings and personal concerns (Matthews & Wells,
1999; Nideffer & Sagal, 2006; Sarason, 1972). This
consumes working memory capacity and directs
attention toward task-irrelevant cues, leaving less
attention to devote to the sporting task (Jones, 2003;
Memmert & Furley, 2007). The worry associated
with anxiety can also lead to a conscious effort to
attend to, and actively control movements, to ensure
success. This can be detrimental to performance,
particularly for well-learned physical skills (Beilock &
Gray, 2007; Matthews & Wells, 1999; Styles, 2006).
Although there is some evidence that other
negative emotions such as sadness (MacLeod,
Mathews, & Tata, 1986), anger (Silva, 1979) and
depression can also influence information processing
and attention in counterproductive ways (Lane,
Terry, Beedie, Curry, & Clark, 2001), this has not
received the same degree of empirical consideration
(Schimmack & Derryberry, 2005). Together this
previous research has, however, indicated that
negative emotions are not categorically useful or
harmful for performance and may even encourage
behaviour that is useful in goal attainment (Tamir
et al., 2007). Therefore it remains important to
ascertain the true pattern of attentional change
associated with anxiety, and also whether these
effects can be extended to the experience of other
negative emotions.
Although sparse, research on positive emotions is
in stark contrast to the picture presented by research
emphasising the detrimental effects of anxiety on
attention. Research suggests that positive emotions
can occur without interrupting ongoing activity,
coexisting successfully with concurrent task execution and promoting movement towards incentives
and goal attainment (Carver, 2004; Carver &
Scheier, 1990). During the experience of positive
emotion, attention has been shown to broaden,

133

fostering openness, flexibility and efficient information integration (Derryberry & Tucker, 1994;
Fredrickson, 2001). Positive emotions are also
predicted to free attentional resources to devote to
goal and task achievement (Gardner & Moore,
2006). In doing so, attention is externalised to taskrelevant cues (Carver & Scheier, 1990; Fredrickson,
2001).
The favourable outcome expectancies associated
with positive emotions are also conducive to uninhibited and automatic movement, which does
not draw on attention capacity and correlates with
superior performance on well-learned physical tasks
(Abernethy, Maxwell, Masters, VanDerKamp, &
Jackson, 2007; Krane & Williams, 2006). Despite
the seemingly contradictory influence of positive and
negative emotions on attention, however, research
exploring this relationship directly, and the consequences for sports performance, is lacking and
indeterminate.
The present study addressed these gaps in knowledge by further exploring the relationship between
anxiety and attention, extending previous research
on anxiety to include dejection and anger, and
contributing to the limited literature on the positive
emotions of excitement and happiness. Furthermore,
the attentional patterns associated with these positive
and negative emotions while competing in sport
are explored and compared, and their consequences
for concentration and performance are examined.
Attentional patterns were measured through selfreported perceptions; this has not been done in
existing research on emotions and attention in sport.
Consistent with a large body of literature, it was
predicted that anxiety, dejection and anger would
attract, consume and maintain attention, internalise
and narrow attention, lead to controlled physical
movements, and lead to a focus on performanceirrelevant factors more than excitement and happiness. As a result it was predicted that positive
emotions would be associated with better concentration and performance effects during competition
than negative emotions.
There is increasing emphasis in the literature
on the importance of considering both the valence
(e.g., positive or negative) and intensity of emotion
(Anderson, 2005; Reisenzein, 1994). Emotional
intensity is also a potential confound when exploring
the relationship between emotion and attention
because of the strong relationships found between
arousal, attentional changes and physical functioning
(Easterbrook, 1959; Jones, 2003; Schimmack &
Derryberry, 2005). Therefore, the intensity of emotions was measured. Drawing on research suggesting
that both high-intensity and low-intensity positive
emotions produce comparable effects on attention,
it was, however, predicted that the valence of the

134

R. L. Vast et al.

emotion would be more important in guiding

attention than emotional intensity alone (Derryberry
& Tucker, 1994; Fredrickson, 2001).

Method
Participants
Participants were 69 female softballers ranging in age
from 18 to 38 years (M 23.01 years, SD 4.96)
competing at a national level tournament. All but
one participant indicated the highest level at which
they had competed in softball: international, n 43,
and national, n 25.
Materials
Sport Emotion Questionnaire. The Sport Emotion
Questionnaire (SEQ) measures five emotions reported by athletes as being most relevant to their
experiences of competing in sport: excitement,
happiness, anxiety, dejection, and anger (Jones,
Lane, Bray, Uphill, & Catlin, 2005). Participants
indicated the extent to which they felt each of
22 emotions during a specific sporting competition
by responding on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4
(extremely).
For the purposes of the current study the response
stem was changed from indicating which emotions
participants were feeling right now, at this moment,
in relation to the upcoming competition (Jones
et al., 2005, p. 431), to which emotions participants
felt during the competition today after its completion. Although the SEQ has been validated to assess
only pre-competition emotions, the items for the
questionnaire were developed by asking athletes
to describe the emotions they had experienced at
any time when competing in sport, not specifically
prior to a competition (Jones et al., 2005, p. 412).
Furthermore, the questionnaire items were also
developed by athletes thinking retrospectively about
previous sporting experiences. Therefore, the task
used to develop the scale was identical to the task
used in the current study of identifying what
emotions the athletes felt while competing in sport,
and reporting this after the competition.
Overall concentration and performance. Perceptions
of overall concentration and performance were
measured through two separate self-report items
asking athletes overall, how well do you think you
concentrated/performed in the competition today?
Participants responded on a 7-point scale from 1
(very poorly) to 7 (very well).
Perceived effect of emotions on attention. The remaining items asked how the experience of the five SEQ

emotions directed attention during the competition.

All questions were responded to on a 7-point scale.
Participants were asked how intense or arousing
was that emotion? with responses ranging from 1
(not at all intense or arousing) to 7 (very intense and
arousing); how much did that emotion grab your
attention? with responses ranging from 1 (it didnt
distract me from my performance) to 7 (it grabbed the full
focus of my attention); during that emotion were your
physical movements automatic or controlled? with
responses ranging from 1 (rigid/controlled/unnatural/
forced) to 7 (smooth/flowing/automatic); during that
emotion was the scope of your attention broad or
narrow? with responses ranging from 1 (narrow focus
on a single factor) to 7 (broad focus on multiple factors);
and how long did the experience of this emotion
last? with responses ranging from 1 (it was hard to
stop thinking about it) to 7 (not long I got on with
performing). This last item was reverse scored.
Participants were also asked what did that emotion
lead you to focus your attention on?, which had two
response scales. The first response scale ranged from
1 (factors unhelpful and irrelevant for my performance)
to 7 (factors helpful and relevant for my performance);
and the second ranged from 1 (internal factors e.g.,
thoughts, feelings, body movements) to 7 (external factors
e.g., environment). There were two further questions
in which participants were asked overall, how did
this emotion affect your concentration/performance
immediately following? to which they responded on
a scale from 1 (negatively, it hindered my concentration/
performance) to 7 (positively, it enhanced my concentration/performance). These questions were theoretically
based and pilot tested with an athlete sample to
ensure that terminology and concepts were easily
understood.
Procedure
Institutional ethics approval was obtained before the
data were collected. Athletes were given an introductory letter and a copy of the questionnaire by the
primary researcher or their coach asking them to
complete the questionnaire as soon as possible after a
game of their choice during the tournament. Athletes
generally completed the questionnaires within 1 hr
of a game (M 87.43 min, SD 218.37). Data were
collected for a period of 2 months across three
different tournaments. The questionnaire took up to
20 min to complete.

Results
Emotion, concentration and performance
On average, the extent to which athletes reported
experiencing emotions was low. As shown in Table 1,

135

Emotion and attention in sport

also conducted to check for linearity, homogeneity of

variance-covariance matrices and multicollinearity,
with no serious violations noted. Participants who
reported not having experienced one of the five
emotions did not complete the questions relating to
that emotion and were hence excluded from the
analyses for that emotion. The variations in sample
size are reported in Table 2, together with the results
of the analyses.
There was a statistically significant difference in
how the emotions were perceived by participants
to have influenced attention, concentration and
performance, F(32,1168) 5.06, p 5 .01, Z2 .12.
A Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of .006 was used to
ascertain which of the outcome variables varied with
emotion, and it indicated that seven of the eight
dependent variables reached statistical significance.
Post-hoc analyses with automatic Bonferroni
adjustment indicated that excitement and happiness
were rated more likely than anxiety, dejection and
anger to lead to a focus on factors helpful for
performance and automatic physical movements
(p 5 .01). Excitement and happiness were also rated
more beneficial to immediate concentration and
performance than anxiety, dejection and anger
(p 5 .01). Excitement and happiness were also more
likely to lead to a broad focus of attention than

excitement was the most prominent emotion experienced by athletes, followed by happiness, anxiety
and very small amounts of anger and dejection.
Concentration was positively correlated with selfrated performance. Happiness and excitement were
positively correlated, as were the negative emotions
anxiety, dejection and anger.
As predicted, happiness and excitement were
positively correlated with concentration, whereas
dejection and anger were negatively correlated with
concentration. Happiness and excitement were also
positively correlated with self-rated performance,
whereas dejection and anxiety were negatively
correlated with self-rated performance.
Emotion and attention
A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with
repeated measures was performed. Emotion was the
independent variable and its perceived effects on
attention, concentration and performance during the
game were the dependent variables. Multivariate
normality was investigated using Mahalanobis distance. Five multivariate outliers were found to
exceed the critical value suggested by Tabachnick
and Fidell (1996) and were therefore removed from
further analysis. Preliminary assumption testing was

Table 1. Bivariate correlations among emotions, concentration, and self-rated performance

Variables
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Excitement
Happiness
Anxiety
Dejection
Anger
Concentration
Self-rated performance

SD

2.26
2.04
1.16
0.70
0.80
5.09
4.41

0.77
0.79
0.79
0.77
0.81
1.17
1.33

.69**
.01
7.28*
7.20
.37**
.26*

7.20
7.32**
7.22
.43**
.54**

.46**
.40**
7.12
7.27*

.79**
7.27*
7.34**

7.24*
7.18

.47**

Note. *p 5 .05; **p 5 .01.

Table 2. Perceived effects of emotions on attention, concentration, and performance

Perceived effects
Attracted and consumed attention
Performance relevant focus
Focus on external factors
Broad focus on multiple factors
Automatic physical movements
Time emotion was focus of attention
Immediate effect on concentration
Immediate effect on performance
Note. *p 5 .006.

Z2

Excitement
n 63
M (SD)

3.71*
27.50*
3.88*
5.52*
20.97*
.97
22.74*
26.15*

.05
.27
.05
.07
.22
.01
.24
.26

5.33
5.84
4.10
4.40
5.49
3.44
5.75
5.68

(1.50)
(1.14)
(1.49)
(1.83)
(1.33)
(1.47)
(1.22)
(1.09)

Happiness
n 64
M (SD)
4.67
5.41
3.95
4.50
5.63
3.12
5.41
5.38

(1.78)
(1.28)
(1.60)
(1.51)
(1.12)
(1.48)
(1.16)
(1.24)

Anxiety
n 65
M (SD)
4.37
4.21
3.25
3.78
4.22
3.31
4.45
4.23

(1.54)
(1.63)
(1.51)
(1.70)
(1.55)
(1.65)
(1.63)
(1.40)

Dejection
n 58
M (SD)
4.41
4.16
3.41
3.47
4.00
3.38
4.02
4.09

(1.77)
(1.69)
(1.59)
(1.76)
(1.49)
(1.69)
(1.54)
(1.35)

Anger
n 57
M (SD)
4.53
3.54
3.70
3.42
4.00
3.47
3.75
3.72

(1.71)
(1.43)
(1.75)
(1.67)
(1.58)
(1.73)
(1.58)
(1.32)

136

R. L. Vast et al.

dejection (p 5 .05; p 5 .01) and anger (p 5 .05;

p 5 .01) respectively. Excitement was perceived to
be more consuming of attentional resources than
anxiety (p 5 .05), dejection (p 5 .05), and anger
(p 5 .05) and more likely to lead to an external focus
of attention than anxiety (p 5 .05). There were no
significant differences in how long each of the
emotions remained the focus of attention.
Two separate multiple regression analyses were
conducted to identify attentional factors that best
predicted the effects on concentration and performance immediately following the experience of
emotion during the game. Preliminary analyses
were conducted to ensure that there were no
violations of the assumptions of normality, linearity,
multicollinearity and homoscedasticity. The predictor variables were the six questionnaire measures
of how each emotion directed attention, and the
dependent variables were their perceived effects on
concentration and performance. Considering all
emotions together, the changes in attention associated with the experience of emotion significantly
explained 53.6% of the variance in perceived effects
on concentration, F(6,300) 57.83, p 5 .001, and
52.3% of the variance in perceived effects on
performance, F(6,300) 54.72, p 5 .001.
The strongest predictors of perceived benefits to
concentration were automatic physical movements
(b .35, p 5 .01), performance-relevant focus
(b .34, p 5 .01) and the emotion remaining the
focus of attention for only a short period of time
(b 7.19, p 5 .01). Analogously, the strongest
predictors of perceived benefits to performance
were also automatic physical movements (b .36,
p 5 .01), performance-relevant focus (b .33,
p 5 .01) and the emotion remaining the focus of
attention for only a short period of time (b 7.17,
p 5 .01). Thus, emotions were perceived to be more
beneficial for both concentration and performance
when they led to automatic physical movements,
performance-relevant focus, and did not remain the
focus of attention for a long period of time.
Emotional intensity and attention
The positive emotions, excitement and happiness,
differed significantly from the negative emotions in
their effect on attention, and resulting concentration
and performance. On average, however, positive
emotions were also rated higher in intensity than
negative emotions. A one-way within-subjects
ANOVA indicated significant differences in the
reported intensity of the emotions, F(4,44) 15.26,
p 5 .01, Z2 .58. Excitement (M 5.83, SD 1.08)
was significantly higher in intensity than anxiety
(M 4.31, SD 1.24), dejection (M 4.56,
SD 1.51), anger (M 4.75, SD 1.59), and

happiness (M 5.29, SD 1.22). Happiness was

also rated significantly higher in intensity than
anxiety.
Further analyses were therefore conducted to
explore relationships between the intensity of emotion and its perceived effects on attention, concentration, and performance. For all emotions except
excitement, intensity was positively correlated with
the degree to which the emotion attracted and
consumed attention: dejection, r .81, p 5 .01;
anxiety, r .45, p 5 .01; anger, r .60, p 5 .01;
happiness, r .41, p 5 .01. The intensity of the
positive emotions positively correlated with a focus
on performance-relevant factors (excitement, r .41,
p 5 .01; happiness, r .29, p 5 .05); smooth and
automatic movements (excitement, r .37, p 5 .01;
happiness, r .30, p 5 .01); effect on concentration
(excitement, r .42, p 5 .01; happiness, r .41,
p 5 .01); and effect on performance (excitement,
r .51, p 5 .01; happiness, r .26, p 5 .05).
In contrast, high-intensity anxiety was negatively
correlated with smooth and automatic movements,
r 7.27, p 5 .05, and positively correlated with the
length of time the emotion remained the focus of
attention, r .28, p 5 .05; thus indicating that highintensity anxiety was difficult to ignore.
Discussion
The aim of the present research was to investigate,
through retrospective self-report, the ways in which
emotions influenced attention while athletes competed in sport, and the perceived effects of these
changes on concentration and performance. Overall,
the hypothesis that negative emotions would influence attention significantly differently than positive
emotions was supported. Also as predicted positive
emotions were associated with better concentration
and self-reported performance than negative emotions. The beneficial role of positive emotions found
in this study is consistent with a large body of
research investigating the emotions associated
with concentration and peak performances in sport
(Krane & Williams, 2006).
Excitement and happiness were positively correlated, and dejection negatively correlated, with
concentration and self-reported performance ratings.
Anger was negatively correlated with concentration
but not performance, whereas anxiety was negatively
correlated with performance but not concentration.
This finding warrants further investigation, particularly because the negative emotions were all positively correlated. The strong inter-correlations found
within the positive and negative emotions are also
consistent with other reports of high correlations
among emotions of the same polarity (Diener &
Emmons, 1985; Jones et al., 2005).

Emotion and attention in sport

As predicted, excitement and happiness were
associated with a broad attentional focus significantly
more than dejection and anger. Excitement was
also associated with externalised attention significantly more than anxiety. These findings support
previous research demonstrating the expansive effect
of positive emotion on attention (Derryberry &
Tucker, 1994; Fredrickson, 2001). Excitement and
happiness were also associated with automaticity of
movement significantly more than anxiety, dejection
and anger (Carver & Scheier, 1990). This finding
is consistent with attentional explanations of the
phenomenon of choking in sport, where concerns
about performance often linked with anxiety and
negative expectations can lead to a conscious effort
to control highly automated physical tasks and an
ultimate degradation in performance (Beilock &
Gray, 2007; Memmert & Furley, 2007; Nideffer &
Sagal, 2006; Styles, 2006). This finding, however,
contributes additional insight that negative emotions
other than anxiety may also have the capacity to
interfere with automaticity.
As hypothesised, excitement and happiness were
associated with a focus on performance-relevant
factors significantly more than anxiety, dejection
and anger. This finding is also consistent with
existing research demonstrating a relationship between anxiety, task-irrelevant thinking, and attending
to threatening rather than task-relevant information
(Derryberry & Tucker, 1994). It is important to
note, however, that although negative emotions were
associated with a reduced focus on performancerelevant factors when compared to positive emotions,
average scores remained at or above the mid-point of
the scale for all emotions except anger. Taken
together, the current research suggests that what has
been found in relation to anxiety and attention in
previous research can also be extended to include
other negative emotions, namely anger and dejection.
Contrary to expectations, excitement was perceived to be significantly more consuming of attention than dejection, anger and anxiety. It was
expected that negative emotions would attract attention more than positive emotions due to negative
attentional biases. In much of the previous research
demonstrating the attention-grabbing power of
negative emotions, however, emotional intensity
has not been controlled (Schimmack & Derryberry,
2005). Stimuli of negative valence are commonly
associated with greater physiological arousal than
positively valenced stimuli (Anderson, 2005;
Schimmack & Derryberry, 2005). Therefore, the fact
that excitement was rated significantly higher in
intensity than the negative emotions may explain this
finding.
It is also interesting to note that although excitement was considered more consuming of attention,

137

this emotion was not reported to be detrimental to

concentration or performance. In fact, both excitement and happiness were associated with higher
levels of concentration and self-rated performance,
and were perceived to have more immediate benefit
to concentration and performance than anxiety,
dejection, and anger.
Despite being rated higher in intensity, excitement
and happiness did not remain the focus of attention
for a significantly different period of time than
anxiety, dejection and anger. This was also contrary
to the expectation that negative emotions would
result in more detailed, prolonged and critical
thinking, thus consuming attention for longer
periods than positive emotions (Anderson, 2005).
It was, however, considered more beneficial for
concentration and performance that all emotions,
regardless of valence, did not remain the focus of
attention for lengthy time periods.
Emotions that led to a focus on performancerelevant factors, facilitated automatic physical movements, and did not remain the focus of attention
for long time periods were perceived to have the
most benefit for concentration and performance.
These results indicate that the potentially detrimental effect of emotions on concentration and performance can be negated through maintaining or
promptly regaining task-relevant focus and automaticity of movement. It also suggests that a narrow and
internal focus of attention may only hinder performance if it leads to a focus on task-irrelevant cues.
This sentiment is consistent with literature suggesting that a narrow or internal focus of attention is
not invariably detrimental, but is in fact essential
for performance on particular tasks (Nideffer &
Sagal, 2006). What may be more important than
the direction or width of attention are the specific
cues that are attended to. It was beyond the scope of
the present study to explore the nature of the taskrelevant and irrelevant cues in order to test this
prediction, but this is an interesting avenue for future
research.
Emotional intensity also played an important role
in guiding attention, but the effect of emotional
intensity was closely related to polarity. Excitement
and happiness intensity was associated with performance-relevant focus, automatic movements and
perceived benefit to concentration and performance.
In contrast, anxiety intensity was associated with
rigid and controlled movements. These findings
suggest that intensity increased the effects of emotions on attention, making the effect of excitement
and happiness on attention even more positive and
the effect of anxiety on attention more negative. This
further highlights the need to consider intensity when
exploring the relationship between emotion and
attention. It is also consistent with literature arguing

138

R. L. Vast et al.

that not all intensity or physiological arousal is

comparable: it is not the intensity or arousal alone
that influences information processing or physical
functioning, but how intensity interacts with the
valence of the emotion (Anderson, 2005; Swain &
Jones, 1996).
Consistent with contemporary theory, negative
emotions were not perceived as being expressly
detrimental to performance (Eysenck & Calvo,
1992; Hardy, 1990). For example, average ratings
of the degree to which anxiety led to performancerelevant focus, automatic physical movements,
and facilitated concentration and performance fell
above the midpoint of the scale, indicating that
anxiety was perceived to have some beneficial
effects. Anxiety may have been considered beneficial
because it encouraged engagement in behaviours to
avoid failure. In contrast, anger and dejection may
have been less favourably rated because they are
more likely to encourage aggressive behaviours or
inaction, respectively, and these behaviours may have
provided less benefit to athletes in competition
(Carver, 2001, 2004; Tamir et al., 2007). When
exploring the perceived utility of emotions in
future research, a consideration of the approach
and avoidance behaviours associated with positive
and negative emotions may prove insightful
(Tamir et al., 2007). It will be important, however,
not to confound motivational direction with affective
valence. Recent evidence links anger and anxiety
to approach and avoidance motivational systems,
respectively, even though both are negatively valenced emotions (Carver & Harmon-Jones, 2009).
Nevertheless, in this study the positive emotions
received more favourable ratings in relation to
attentional patterns and immediate benefits for concentration and performance than anxiety, dejection
and anger.
From an applied perspective, these findings could
be used in psychological skills training with athletes,
closely linking the skills of emotional and attentional
control. For example, there may be benefit in
generating and reducing different emotional states
in order to encourage attentional patterns appropriate for particular sports, or for the execution of
specific tasks within a sport. Cognitive behavioural
techniques such as cognitive restructuring, selfstatement modification, thought stoppage and visualisation have been shown to effectively reduce
unhelpful emotions, and lead to increases in sports
performance (Carter, Forys, & Oswald, 2008;
Jones, 2003). The current findings support sport
psychology practitioners use of cognitive behavioural techniques aimed at controlling emotions
as a means of also addressing problems with
attention and concentration. These possibilities
warrant further investigation.

In light of these findings it is important to consider

any limitations that may influence interpretations.
A reliance on self-reported performance is potentially
problematic when individual differences in standards
and the meaning assigned to numerical values may
influence ratings. It is also arguable that reports
of emotions and performance may have been
influenced by the outcome of the game. Analyses,
however, were conducted to explore differences in
emotions and performance ratings following a win or
a loss, with no significant differences found. Athlete
perceptions may also not be completely synonymous
with the objective reality of the effect of emotions
on attention and performance. Similarly, although
phrasing of the questionnaire was considered carefully to explore specific relationships, the relationships between emotions, attention and performance
may be multi-directional and these systems may
operate and interact simultaneously. Therefore, any
conclusions drawn can only be tentative given
the correlational design of the study. There is also
minimal evidence of the psychometric properties of
the specifically designed measures used in the study.
Validated measures could be developed and used in
future research investigating these issues.
Furthermore, although this study uniquely explored perceptions of the immediate effect of
emotions, data were still collected retrospectively.
It will remain problematic, however, to interrupt
athletic performance during a competition, particularly an important competition, when emotions are
likely to be more extreme. Recent research has also
suggested that asking athletes to report emotions
retrospectively is valid and that athletes can accurately recall how they felt at various stages of a
competition regardless of whether they exceeded or
failed to meet performance expectations (Harger &
Raglin, 1994; Seve et al., 2007).
Future research can attempt to overcome these
limitations through exploring how emotions influence attention while performing subcomponents
of sport skills, or discrete physical tasks, in which
performance can be measured objectively. As mentioned previously, it may also be fruitful to explore
the effects on performance of directing attention
toward or away from performance-relevant cues
when experiencing emotion, or generating emotional
states likely to encourage attentional patterns necessary for the execution of specific sporting tasks
(e.g., Gucciardi & Dimmock, 2008). Future research
can also attempt to extend the applicability of
these findings to performance in other non-sporting
domains, across a range of both physical and
non-physical tasks.
In sum, the present study explored the relationship
between emotions and attention through investigating, via retrospective self-report, a range of emotions

Emotion and attention in sport

occurring during a sporting competition, and perceptions of their immediate effect on concentration
and performance. In doing so, the findings provide
insight regarding the benefits of positive emotions for
concentration and performance and the differences
in how emotions are perceived to influence attention.
These differences may have applied significance and
important performance consequences and future
research is required to further explore these relationships. Maintaining or quickly regaining task-relevant
focus and performing movements automatically
consistently led to optimal concentration and performance in competition; an attentional pattern that
was more likely to be produced when experiencing
positive than negative emotion.

References
Abernethy, B., Maxwell, J. P., Masters, R. S. W., Van Der Kamp,
J., & Jackson, R. C. (2007). Attentional processes in
skill learning and expert performance. In G. Tenenbaum, &
R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed.,
pp. 245263). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Anderson, A. K. (2005). Affective influences on the attentional
dynamics supporting awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2, 258281.
Beilock, S. L., & Gray, R. (2007). Why do athletes choke under
pressure? In G. Tenenbaum, & R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook
of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 425444). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Boutcher, S. H. (2002). Attentional processes and sport performance. In T. S. Horn (Ed.). Advances in sport psychology
(2nd ed., pp. 441457). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Carter, M. M., Forys, K. L., & Oswald, J. C. (2008). The
cognitive-behavioural model. In M. Hersen., & A. M. Gross
(Eds.), Handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 171204).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Carver, C. S. (2001). Affect and the functional bases of behaviour:
On the dimensional structure of affective experience. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 345356.
Carver, C. S. (2004). Negative affects deriving from the
behavioural approach system. Emotion, 4, 322.
Carver, C. S., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2009). Anger is an approachrelated affect: Evidence and implications. Psychological Bulletin,
135, 183204.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of
positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 1935.
Derryberry, D., & Tucker, D. M. (1994). Motivating the focus of
attention. In P. M. Niedenthal, & S. Kitayama (Eds.), The
hearts eye: Emotional influences in perception and attention
(pp. 167196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). The independence of
positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 47, 11051117.
Easterbrook, J. A. (1959). The effect of emotion on cue utilization
and the organization of behaviour. Psychological Review, 66,
183201.
Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and
performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition and
Emotion, 6, 409434.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in
positive psychology. American Psychologist, 56, 218226.
Gardner, F., & Moore, Z. (2006). Clinical sport psychology.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

139

Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion

regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression,
and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
224237.
Gucciardi, D. F., & Dimmock, J. A. (2008). Choking under
pressure in sensorimotor skills: Conscious processing or
depleted attentional resources? Psychology of Sport and Exercise,
9, 4559.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1994). Automatic emotion:
Attention and facial efference. In P. M. Niedenthal, &
S. Kitayama (Eds.), The hearts eye: Emotional influences in
perception and attention (pp. 217243). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Hardy, L. (1990). A catastrophe model of performance in sport. In
J. G. Jones, & L. Hardy (Eds.), Stress and performance in sport
(pp. 81106). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Harger, G. J., & Raglan, J. S. (1994). Correspondence between
actual and recalled precompetitive anxiety in collegiate track
and field athletes. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16,
206211.
Jones, M. V. (2003). Controlling emotions in sport. The Sport
Psychologist, 17, 471486.
Jones, M. V., Lane, A. M., Bray, S. R., Uphill, M., & Catlin, J.
(2005). Development and validation of the sport emotion
questionnaire. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 27, 407
431.
Krane, V., & Williams, J. M. (2006). Psychological characteristics
of peak performance. In J. M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport
psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (5th ed.,
pp. 207227). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Lane, A. M., Terry, P. C., Beedie, C. J., Curry, D. A., & Clark, N.
(2001). Mood and performance: Test of a conceptual model
with a focus on depressed mood. Psychology of Sport and
Exercise, 2, 157172.
Lang, P. J. (2000). Emotion and motivation: Attention, perception, and action. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20,
S122S140.
Lazarus, R. S. (2000). How emotions influence performance in
competitive sports. Sport Psychologist, 14, 229252.
MacLeod, C., Mathews, A., & Tata, P. (1986). Attentional bias in
emotional disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95, 1520.
Matthews, G., & Wells, A. (1999). The cognitive science of
attention and emotion. In T. Dalgleish, & M. J. Power (Eds.),
Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 171192). West Sussex:
John Wiley & Sons.
McAuley, E., & Duncan, T. E. (1990). Cognitive appraisal and
affective reactions following physical achievement outcomes.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12, 415426.
Memmert, D., & Furley, P. (2007). I spy with my little eye!:
Breadth of attention, inattentional blindness, and tactical
decision making in team sports. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 29, 365381.
Nideffer, R. M., & Sagal, M. (2006). Concentration and attention
control training. In J. M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport
psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (5th ed.,
pp. 382403). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Ohman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives
attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 466478.
Orlick, T., & Partington, J. (1988). Mental links to excellence.
Sport Psychologist, 2, 105130.
Reisenzein, R. (1994). Pleasure-arousal theory and the intensity
of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67,
525539.
Sarason, I. G. (1972). Experimental approaches to test
anxiety: Attention and the uses of information. In C. D.
Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research
(pp. 380403). New York: Academic Press.

140

R. L. Vast et al.

Schimmack, U., & Derryberry, D. (2005). Attentional interference

effects of emotional pictures: Threat, negativity or arousal.
Emotion, 5, 5566.
Seve, C., Ria, L., Poizat, G., Saury, J., & Durand, M. (2007).
Performance-induced emotions experienced during highstakes table tennis matches. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,
8, 2546.
Silva, J. M. (1979). Behavioural and situational factors affecting
concentration and skill performance. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1, 221227.
Smith, R. E. (1996). Performance anxiety, cognitive interference,
and concentration enhancement strategies in sports. In I. G.
Sarason, G. R. Pierce, & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive
interference: Theories, methods, and findings (pp. 261284).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Styles, E. (2006). Automaticity, skill and expertise. In E. Styles

(Ed.), The psychology of attention (pp. 183214). New York:
Psychology Press.
Swain, A., & Jones, G. (1996). Explaining performance
variance: The relative contribution of intensity and direction
dimensions of competitive state anxiety. Anxiety, Stress and
Coping, 9, 118.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate
statistics. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Tamir, M., Chiu, C. Y., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Business or
pleasure? Utilitarian versus hedonic considerations in emotion
regulation. Emotion, 7, 546554.
Yantis, S., & Johnson, D. N. (1990). Mechanisms of attentional
priority. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception
and Performance, 16, 812825.

Copyright of Australian Psychologist is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.