Where Is the Home Choke?
Lab and field data did not support the home-choke hypothesis as it was articulated by R. F. Baumeister and A. Steinhilber (1984) . Home teams do not perform poorly in key games. Furthermore, evidence favors a darker form of choking (social pressure plus self-doubts), not the kinder form (disruptive...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of personality and social psychology 1995-04, Vol.68 (4), p.649-652 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Lab and field data did not support the home-choke hypothesis as it was articulated by
R. F. Baumeister and A. Steinhilber (1984)
.
Home teams do not perform poorly in key games. Furthermore, evidence favors a darker form of choking (social pressure plus self-doubts), not the kinder form (disruptive fantasies of success in front of a supportive audience) that explicitly distinguished the home choke.
R. F. Baumeister's (1995)
reply clouded the concept of the home choke and blurred the standards for its assessment. Even the new measure he proposed usually favored the home team. For coaches and players, the data offer a straightforward conclusion: Take the home field if you have a choice. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-3514 1939-1315 |
DOI: | 10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.649 |