Strengths and weaknesses of reflection as a guide to action

pressure assails performance in multiple ways

Thomas H. Carr

pp. 227-252

in: Massimiliano Cappuccio (ed), Unreflective action and the choking effect, Phenomenology and the cognitive sciences 14 (2), 2015.

Abstract

The current status of Beilock and Carr's (2001) "execution focus" theory of choking under pressure in performance of a sensorimotor skill is reviewed and assessed, mainly from the perspective of cognitive psychology, and put into the context of a wider range of issues, attempting to take philosophical analysis into account. These issues include other kinds of skills, pre-performance practice, post-performance evaluation and repair, and integrating new and creative achievements into repertoires of heavily practiced routines. The focus is on variation in the demand for reflection versus automaticity across the full gamut of learning and experience, not just game-time performance. Though automaticity remains important and there are many circumstances in which being "in the zone" is good whereas "execution focus" can do harm, it appears that reflective action deserves just as much a place at the performance table as does unreflective action.