Research Methods paper (Literature Review & State of problem)

Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2000, 91, 1057-1075. O Perceptual and Motor Skills 2000

EFFECTS OF HYPNOSIS ON FLOW STATES AND GOLF PERFORMANCE ‘

JOHN PATES AND IAN MAYNARD

Sbeffield Hallam University

Summary.-This study examined the effects of an hypnotic intervention on flow states and golf-chipping performance of 3 participants. The study u d z e d an ideo- graphic ABA single-subject design combined with a procedure to assess the partici- pants’ internal experience (Wollman, 1986). The intervention involved relaxation, im- agery, hypnotic induction, hypnotic regression, and trigger control procedures over 5 wk. and 7 trials. Analysis indicated the 3 participants increased their mean golf-chip- ping performance from the trials in B a s e h e 1 to intervention, with 2 returning to Baseline 1 performance after the intervention phase at Baseline 2. The intensity of Bow experienced by the participants during the performance trials was measured us- ing Jackson and Marsh’s 1996 Flow State Scale. Two participants experienced higher flow during the intervention phase and much lower flow during Baselines 1 and 2. Fi- nally, participants indicated the intervention seemed useful in keeping them confident, relaxed, and in control. These results support the hypothesis that an hypnotic inter- vention can improve golf-chipping performance and increase feelings and cognitions associated with Bow.

The literature on sport psychology clearly indicates at least three differ- ent constructs underlying successful athletic performance. The first is flow (Cs~kszentrnihalyi, 1975; Furlong, 1976), defined as an intrinsically enjoyable experience. The second is peak performance (Privette, 1981; Privette & Landsman, 1983; Garfield, 1984), defined as an episode of superior function- ing, and the third is peak experience (Laski, 1962; Maslow, 1971), defined as an intense and highly valued moment. Ravizza (1977) and Privette (1983) have argued that in a given situation individuals may experience more than one of these phenomena. Indeed, a comparative analysis of these phenomena (Privette, 1983) suggested that they share many of the same quahties, includ- ing absorption, involvement, joy, valuing, self-identity, responsibility, sponta- neity, freedom, awareness of power, lost time and sp&ce, and temporality.

The evidence implies that the phenomena are interrelated, so that un- der certain circumstances the experience of one phenomenon may trigger a second and even a third (Privette, 1983; Privette & Bundrick, 1991, 1997; Jackson & Roberts, 1992). For this reason Grove and Lewis (1996) have indicated that these experiences can be collectively labelled ‘flow’ states.

‘Please address correspondence to John Pates, Centre for Sport and Exercise Science, Sheffield H+m University, Colle iate Crescent Campus, 39 Broomgrove Road, Sheffield, South York- shlre, S10 2BP or e-mail [email protected]).

1058 J. PATES & I. MAYNARD

The key to the flow experience as suggested by Cslkszentm~halyi (1975) is the relationship between s k d and challenge. When a balance occurs, there is flow. In contrast, when one perceives opportunities for action as mis- matched by one’s capabhties, then one experiences either boredom, worry, or anxiety depending upon the extent to which action opportunities (chal- lenge) and action capabilities (skill) diverge. This relationship was represent- ed in a model of the flow state initially developed by Csiks~entmihal~i and Bennet (197 1) and presented by CsLkszentmLhalyi (1975).

The occurrence of a flow situation, however, clearly depends upon one’s perception of what the challenges and one’s skllls are as opposed to the actual situation. It is possible, therefore, for different people to experi- ence flow, anxiety, worry, and boredom under the same objective level of action opportunities. In addition, there seem to be many variables that may influence this relationship.

Although there are clear limitations to the model, it st~Ll remains intu- itively appealing for its direct implications. For instance, it seems likely that the performance of athletes depends in part on the intensity of flow experi- enced. While there is much anecdotal and qualitative evidence supporting this conjecture (e.g., Ravizza, 1984), empirical evidence is rare (Jackson & C~ikszentmihal~i, 1999). Quantitative research has lagged behind experien- tial awareness of flow given the inherent difficulties of applying empirical methods to phenomenological experience. Recently, however, Jackson and Marsh (1996) developed a psychometrically valid and usable scale for assess- ing flow in sport and physical activity. Specifically, the Flow State Scale pro- vides a global quantitative measure of the flow experience or single quantita- tive measures of nine distinct components of flow.

The components of flow identified by Jackson and Marsh (19961, in- clude Challenge and Skill Balance, Action and Awareness Merging, Clear Goals, Unambiguous Feedback, Concentration on the Task at Hand, Para- dox of Control, Loss of Self-consciousness, Transformation of Time, and Autotelic Experience. This scale may aid research by allowing a quantitative examination of the relationship between the flow and performance.

From a phenomenological perspective, flow states are similar to hyp- notic states (Unestahl, 1983; Grove & Lewis, 1996). Interviews conducted by Unestahl (1983) on many elite athletes after they experienced peak perfor- mance show flow states and hypnotic states share many of the same verbal descriptions. These include changes in thinking, e.g., paralysis by analysis or too much thinkmg precluding action, memory (e.g., amnesia), perception (e.g., slow motion and enlargement of objects), dissociation (e.g., pain de- tachment), and information processing (e.g., parallel processing). Other shared elements of these states include dissociation and detachment from one’s surroundings, absorption, feehgs of control, and ~erceptual distor-

HYPNOSIS AND FLOW STATES IN GOLF 1059

tions such as altered perceptions of time (Kihlstrom, 1985). Support for the association between hypnosis and flow states has also come from other sources. For example, Masters (1992) found a positive relation between dis- sociation and hypnotic abhty in marathon runners.

Arguably the strongest support for a connection berween flow states and hypnotic states comes from the work of Gallwey (1974) and Unestahl (1986) as specifically, both defined a flow state as a hemisphere shift, that is, an activation of the right hemisphere and a corresponding deactivation of the left hemisphere of the brain. Both have also argued that, because flow states are generally identified with right hemisphere dominance, then a shift in consciousness from the left hemisphere (dominant mode) to the right hemisphere (alternative mode) wdl give better access to functions important for good athletic performance. Lnterestingly, theoretical explanations of hyp- notic phenomena suggest hypnosis may fachtate the process of hemispheric s h h . For example, Orne’s theory of cortical inhibition (1959) proposed that hypnosis may inhibit the functions of the dominant cerebral hemisphere and allow the nondominant hemisphere functions to take control. Empirical sup- port for Orne’s theory is evident in contemporary electrocortical research (Graffin, Ray, & Lundy, 1995; Crawford, Clarke, & Kitner-Triolo, 1996).