This weeks group task (jenga) was a competitive and challenging task with a strong sense of psychological influence. The 'Face' successively won this weeks task, but the major contributors towards this success were mainly as a result of luck or poor opposition decisions. In terms of attributes of success, this weeks performance was not controlable. In reflection, there were key moments of opposition tactics that ultimately contributed majorly to the teams success. Both teams had clear objectives, and the rules of the game additionally provides controllable constraints. It can therefore be presumed that only individual decision making was to be the weakness of team performance.
In terms of mental attitude i feel the partnership was supportive but very relaxed (confident) with a clear belief that winning was a controllable factor. It is important to note that due to the results of the task it is difficult to reflect on the negative impact of the belief of maintained control of the outcome. Foe example as identified by Stopforth et al. (2005) if the partnership had been subjected to a defeat then this may have had a major influence of the emotions of anger, dissapointment and shame. However as this was apparently not the case, it became evident that confidence increased and emotions of satisfaction and competence were displayed. It is also important to note that throughout the task although belief that the outcome was positively controllable there was also the knowledge that the decisions of the opposition were strongly uncontrollable.
In sport a common sense of personal stability is always portrayed with results of a match being personally reflected as a controllable outcome, leading the dissapointment. It is rarely that emotions of anger are expressed during competition however incidences where situations portrayed as stable have not been successful and feelings of anger have been felt. Personally i commonly attribute success as a personal responsibility, which in tern makes me try harder to rectify a situation or generally work harder.
In reflection i think it would be correct to suggest that attribution do influence future performance, an example of this may be where a competitor has reflected a defeat as a result of personal attributions. This would therefore influence future performance where the performer identifies a similar situations and allows emotions to be reflected upon. This impact of previous emotion may become attributed directly to a situation. This however does not reflect the results provide by Stopforth et al. (2005).
