Running Head: STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

External Stimuli Effects on Athletic Performance

Brandon J. Crooks
The Pennsylvania State University

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

Abstract
This paper expects to see that with the introduction of a specific stimulus, at varying vicinities, a
subject will benefit from affects that will cause their athletic performance to increase. The
participants will complete a set of tasks while being observed and from those results we will
determine if there was in fact an increase in performance. This will be determined by comparing
the lab results to baseline results received before the study begins. In this paper increase athletic
performance is defined as completing a task more times than previously done. It is expected that
because of the introduction of an observer the participants will perform better at a task. As the
conditions of the manipulations changes so does the strength of the effect on the person
performing the task. This changing of effect strength results in different levels of increases in
performance.

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

External Stimuli Effects on Athletic Performance

The human body can do amazing things, but more often than not we put mental limits on
ourselves that manifest into physical limits. This basically amounts to a person not reaching their
true performance potential. Whats amazing is that there are times when these people break these
limits, and the interesting thing is the circumstances surrounding the reason for it could be
coming from an external stimulus. In these instances these people are able to produce better
performance results. Results that are far better than what the person produces when that stimuli is
not present.
My interest lies in the external stimulus that allows us to surpass these limits people place
on themselves. These external stimuli Im referring to are people, and not just anybody, people
who hold some significance to the person breaking their limits. Does the presence of someone
attractive of the opposite sex increase ones performance? What about someone of the same sex,
friend, family member, or significant other? From previous research we know in fact that outside
stimuli be they a person or inanimate object can influence someones performance on a simple
task.
In a study done by Deborah Roedder John and Ji Kyung Park we learn that certain people
can be influenced by an outside stimuli to the point that it causes a persons performance in a
task to get better. The article I Think I Can, I Think I Can: Brand Use, Self-efficacy, and
Performance (Park, & John, 2014) details a study where people are subjected to an outside
stimuli which causes their performance on a task to increase. What the researchers of this article
were looking for was an increase in performance from certain individuals when introduced with
a specific stimuli (brand name product). From this article we learn that the environment and how

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

you perceive it can effect ones performance. The study had four separate experiments, but the
most relevant one came when participants were asked to complete tasks while drinking water
from a plain cup, or a cup with a Gatorade logo on it. Participants were able to perform better at
tasks while drinking water from the Gatorade cup because they felt consciously that Gatorade
made them better. When in actuality they themselves were the one increasing their performance.
Participants were able to pass previous limitations they had put on themselves with the help of an
outside stimulus.
With studies like the one done in the article Peer Influence on Students estimates of
performance: Social comparison in clinical rotations (Raat, Kuks, van Hell, CohenSchotanus,
2013) we can pull from the idea of comparison and how this effects a person belief on what they
can do. This article introduces the ideas of comparison and self-efficacy, and how they work
together. In the study students are told the score of another student on a task, from there the
student is to say how he thinks he/she will do on the same task. The researchers were looking to
see if students would rate their expected performance as better, worse or similar when compared
with another peers varying results and if the student own self-efficacy played a role in the results.
From this study we focus on the effect the peers had on each other. Unlike the study we dont tell
participants what pass participates did. Instead the peer to peer relationship comes from the
person observing them. The observer will be around the same age, we did this because we expect
social comparison to play a role in how the participant performs. In our study the presence of an
observer doesnt just make a participant inherently better. The participant performs better at a
performance because of internal motives.
Another study that falls along the same lines as the study presented in this paper was
presented in the article The Role of Internal and External Sources of Evaluation on Motivating

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

Task Performance (Harkins, White, Utman, 2000). The similarities comes from this studys focus
on the effect that a person can have on anothers performance. This study looked at how goalsetting and the internal and external factors that influence it. The researchers believed that both
self-evaluation and the seeking self-knowledge are required for goal setting and goal reaching.
This studying introduced the effect supervision or being observed had on performance when
completing a task. Participants were asked to generate ideas for uses of a knife. The researchers
designed different conditions for the participants to go through to see how that effected how
many ideas were generated. The results of the study showed that when the participants were
supervised, or told a researcher would come in to tally their ideas the participants generated the
most ideas. This study showed how performance output is effect by the adding of another person.
From this study we learn that the greatest output of performance happens when someone else is
present.
Ultimately what I want to see is a relationship where because person A is in the vicinity
of person B, and person B performs past his/her baseline performance in a specific physical
activity as a result. Simply put certain people can cause a persons performance on a physical
activity to increase, so much so that it could be clearly measured and manipulated by inserting
different types of the same stimuli (people) to create conditions. When referring to the paper this
statement can be further focused by saying the performance of a person will significantly
increase when someone of the opposite sex is in the vicinity. When looking at independent
variable 1 which is gender type present. I believe the presence of someone of the opposite sex
will offer a greater increase in performance than someone of the same sex. When looking at
variable 2 which is vicinity, or how far or close the observer is. I believe the closer the observer
is to the participant, meaning distance, the greater the influence the observer has on ones

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

performance. The determining factor for how much ones performance increase is based on the
vicinity of variable 1. Meaning as distance increase you will see a negative effect on the results.
As the distance increases, the effect offered by variable 1 will decrease. Distance is a deciding
factor in this effect because based on somethings vicinity to a subject, determines how aware the
subject is of it. To relate that back to the topic at hand, it simply means the closer the stimulus is
to the subject the more the subject is aware of it, in turn increasing the effect the stimulus has on
the subject.
Method
The goal of my manipulations will be to see if there is a difference in effect strength
across the cells. I predicted that the cell with the combined conditions of close vicinity to
participant, and opposite-sex observer will show the greatest increase in performance. By having
the participants go through all four cells and experiencing each combination of the conditions, I
will be able to see the data Im looking for.
Design
This study has a 2 (Gender types: same-sex or opposite sex) x 2 (Vicinity: far or close)
within subjects, repeated-measures factorial design, with increased performance results as the
dependent variable. There are two independent variables in this study. The first one is gender
type, and the second is vicinity/distance. Both independent variables have two levels. Gender
type, or independent variable 1 two conditions are opposite sex present, and same-sex present.
This means subjects will either have someone of the same-sex or opposite sex present when they
complete their tasks. Vicinity/distance, or variable 2 conditions are close, and far. This
determines how close independent variable 1 (gender type) will be to the participants. The first

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

level (close) of variable 2 (vicinity) means the observer is 5 yards away, while the second level
(far) of variable 2 (vicinity) means the observer is 15 yards away. The study is a within subjects
design so participants will go through each combination of independent variables levels once.
This means a participant will complete the study four separate times in the lab. The dependent
variable or focus of this study is an increase in performance. This increase will operationalized
by comparing the results in the study to baseline results from the participant. Baseline results will
be acquired before the participants complete the in lab tasks. This way we will be able to
compare the new results against the previous results to see if an increase in performance
occurred, and if it follows the trend we hypothesized.
Participants
The participants for this study will come from a college student population. This puts the
age range for participants around 18-23. These students were randomly selected from a pool of
1,717 students who answered a questionnaire about fitness. A total of 100 participants were
selected to be used in this study, 50 males and 50 females. This age group of the population was
chosen because we believed the effect of social facilitation would be the greatest here. Social
facilitation is a theory that basically states in the presents of others ones performance will be
influenced. When an individual performs a task, the effect of an audience or coactors is to
increase the individuals arousal level, which in turn increases the emission of dominant
responses in the individuals response repertoire (Colman, 2015). Based on the complexity of the
task you can determine if the effect on performance will be positive or negative.
Materials

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

This study doesnt require any of the special equipment you would expect from a study
that is observing increased performance. In the study, increased performance is defined simply as
completing a task more times than you did a previous time. Given the nature of the study and
how it was set up, little is needed. This study requires two confederates, set of repetition based
exercises, and a questionnaire. The two confederates will represent independent variable 1
(gender type). They will be represent while the participants complete their task. Their job will be
to act as if they are just assessing the participants fitness level. They will also count and write
down the results of each task completed by the participant. The set of exercises for the study can
be any exercise of your choosing. It best when picking exercises to pick ones that are simple and
can be easily counted as the movement is completed. The simpler the task the less you have to
worry about the presence of the observer causing a decrease in performance. The questionnaire is
given to the participants before they come in for the study. It collects basic demographic and
background information on the person completing the study. The second purpose of this
questionnaire is to get baseline results. The end of the questionnaire will prompt participates to
complete the same task that will be done in the lab on their own and to record their results.
Procedure
The participants will complete a series of exercises while under observation. These
exercises will be basic strength conditioning exercises. The exercises picked for this study will
be push-ups, sit-ups, and squats. Each exercise will be done to fatigue. The participant will
complete each exercise once. How many times the participants complete the movement will
determine their performance on that task. These exercises were picked because of their ability to
be counted/measured and their relative simplicity. These exercise do not require any advance
coordination or talent. This has two advantages. With the relative ease to measure such task,

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

comparative results that are accurate in showing an increase in ones performance can be made.
Also, since the task are simple ones and not complex ones, in accordance with social facilitation
this means participant should only do better because someone is watching them and not worst.
Since the main focus of the study is to look for an increase in performance, participants will be
asked to do these tasks on their own before they come in for the study. This preliminary task set
is to get baseline results. These baseline results will be what we compare the results of the in-lab
task completion. With a participants baseline results and in-lab results we will be able to discern
an increase in performance and under what condition it occurred.
Results
An ANOVA will be conducted to examine the influence of gender type and vicinity on
increasing performance. This study has a 2 (Gender types: same-sex or opposite sex) x 2
(Vicinity: close (5 yards) or far (15 yards)) within subjects, repeated measures factorial design,
with increased performance results as the dependent variable. The results should indicate that
there is a main effect for gender type such that participants who are observed by someone of the
opposite sex will on average show higher performance increase results (M = 3.5) than those who
are observed by someone of the same sex (M = 2; p < .05). There will be a second main effect of
vicinity, as participants who were observed from 5 yards away will on average show greater
increased performance scores (M = 4) than participants who were observed from 15 yards away
(M = 1.5; p < .05). The results are also expected to indicate that there is a significant interaction
between gender type and how close a person is to the participant (p < .05). Refer to Table 1 for
the expected pattern of means.

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

10

In order to determine the nature of the interaction, the means for each condition will be
plotted and are expected to look like Figure 1. When participants are observed by someone far
away, there will be little average difference in performance scores between those who are
observed by someone of the same sex (M = 1) and someone of the opposite sex (M = 2).
However, when the observers is 5 yards away, those who are observed by someone of the
opposite sex will on average have much higher increased performance results (M = 5) than those
who are observed by someone of the same sex (M = 3). Thus, when participants are performing
an athletic task, being observed by someone of the opposite sex is expected to greatly improve
the participants performance at a task, whereas being observed by someone of the same-sex is
expected to only slightly increase their performance.
Discussion
From the results of the study we expect to see that when looking at athletic performance,
a person will perform to or pass their full potential when someone of the opposite sex is present.
Another factor that plays apart in this phenomenon is the distance between the two. As the
distance increases the strength of the effect will decrease. This is because as the distant increase
the person is less and less in the presence of the person performing the task. The person
performing the task no longer is being influence by the effect we call social facilitation and goes
back to a performance state that will offer the same results as completing a task alone.
Some threats to this studys validity comes from how the dependent variable of the study
is measured. In the study the dependent variable is increased performance, this is operationalized
by a greater number of tasks being completed than before. Since the tasks are athletic in nature
any increase in performance could come from a person becoming stronger from doing the

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

11

previous tasks and not from the independent variables themselves. To minimize this, the study
will encompass two weeks. The first week participants will go through the first two cells the
design and the next week they will go through the last two. With the time of the study being so
short participate bodies arent given a chance to acclimate and become stronger.
The two main threats to the internal validity of a study like this are testing effects and
order effect. Both threats are pretty similar with one main distinction that sets them apart. Order
effect involves a problem with the manipulation or independent variable while testing involves a
problem with the dependent variable. Testing effect is a problem that occurs when you make
participants do the same or similar task more than once. Participants will either get better
naturally at the task, or learn to expect what they need to do in a task. This will usually result in
higher than normal results or scores. This study is a 2x2 within subjects, repeated-measure
design. Meaning one participant will do the study four times, five if you count the outside lab
task. This could cause my results to be skewed positively, since later on in the study participant
will have done these task a number of times before. If this holds true then I would see that
opposite of the results I expected. The higher results would be in the cells that are designated
with the same-sex condition. The other threat a study like this faces is order effect. Order effect
comes about when you have participants go through the same order of independent levels. The
second time around participants are likely to know what to expect from a study, similar to testing
effect. Even though order effect is something that will come up in an experiment like this, it will
not change the expected results.
One hurdle a study faces when it is being proposed is external validity. As we see it,
external validity is the idea that under any circumstance, anywhere else, you will see the same
results that you acquired while doing your study. Basically does what you hypothesized to be

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

12

true apply to everyone. In our study of performance we hypothesized that when in the presence
of someone of the opposite sex a persons performance on a simple athletic task will greatly
increase. We believe this hypothesis holds true to the world because of social facilitation. Social
facilitation is the phenomenon that effects all humans. It occurs when a person is in the presence
of another. The person being observed will do better at a task if it is a simple or well-rehearsed
one. This is believed to be the reason no matter if the observer was a boy or girl an increase was
seen.
If the study is successful I would like to replicate it again but this time bring in more
equipment to accurately measure if the increase in performance was physical or mental. Simply
meaning was it the persons will that pushed them pass their limits or was it a bodily change that
helped them. In future studies heart rate, the force at which a task is completed, and
questionnaires probing a participants mind state as the task was being completed. These things
will help discern if an observer has a physical or mental effect on a person performing a task.
With the expected results being true the next step for this study would revolve around
tasks that are not athletic in nature. One could make the case that this study holds true because of
a humans nature to show off to the opposite sex. In the wild only the biggest, and strongest will
survive and reproduce. The results we were seeing could have been just basic human instinct.
What if the task involve something more abstract, like knowledge. Would we see the same
results that we acquired in this study? Would these effects transfer over to learning, or test
performance? These are the questions that must be answered and that is the next step of the
study.

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

13

At this point in time this study would benefit the health and fitness world. I expect fitness
and athletic performance to take new leaps and bounds with the results of this study. This
research would suggest for max performance one must not only find a workout partner, but that
work out partner must be of the opposite sex. Many people put mental limits on themselves that
manifest into physical ones, but with the help of another person these limits can be surpassed and
broken.
References
Colman, A.(2015). drive theory of social facilitation. In A Dictionary of Psychology. : Oxford
University Press. Retrieved 3 Dec. 2015, from
http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199657681.001.0001/acref9780199657681-e-2502.
Harkins, S. G., White, P. H., & Utman, C. H. (2000). The role of internal and external sources of
evaluation in motivating task performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
26(1), 100-117. doi:10.1177/0146167200261010.
Ketterer, H., & Han, K. (2007). Drive Theory. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Social Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 265-267). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Park, J. I. K., & John, D. R. (2014). I think I can, I think I can: Brand use, self-efficacy, and
performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(2), 233-247.
Raat, A. N., Kuks, J. B. M., van Hell, E. A., & CohenSchotanus, J. (2013). Peer influence on
students estimates of performance: Social comparison in clinical rotations. Medical
Education, 47(2), 190-197.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1111/medu.12066.

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

Figure 1. Interaction between gender type and vicinity on increased performance results.

14

STIMULI EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE

15