Abstract
After reviewing the literature linking threat, and relaxation to motor performance, Neiss (1988) concluded that both the construct of arousal and the hypothesis of an inverted-U relationship between performance and arousal should be abandoned. These arguments were, however, based on research that does not permit clear evaluation of either the construct of arousal or the inverted-U hypothesis. Furthermore, some of Neiss's assumptions are questionable. This article reviews evidence that provides strong support for the inverted-U hypothesis. It is concluded that the concept of arousal is pragmatically useful in organizing a broad range of behavioral data
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
