The purpose of consequence mode is to push athletes to their mental limits with consequences applied to modify their decision-making behaviour. To test and challenge their resilience to mistakes and see how quickly they can gather themselves to meet the challenge, refocus, and perform better in the face of their mistake-based consequence.
It is easy to be accurate when you are going slow but can you be accurate and fast? This is much more challenging. If you face a consequence, can you refocus and continue performing at a high level until the end of the task? Can you eliminate, or at least minimize, errors from your performances? This skill requires mental toughness. It is the very same skill you need in sport when things do not go your way. It is much easier to perform well when everything is in your favour, we need our athletes to recover quickly from mistakes and to pull themselves together to make a performance comeback right after they have dropped the ball. So often we see athletes spiral in performance after a mistake. They make more and more mistakes, eventually clocking it down to just a bad day. However, we can train our athletes to build the mental toughness required to recover from an error and then immediately perform at a higher more focused level. This kind of mental toughness can take years of competitive experience to clock up. Fortunately, now you can target and train that very skill by applying time-based consequences for decision-making errors while your athletes engage in their cognitive training.
Individuals who are sensitive to punishment are thought to respond more negatively to punishment (e.g. aversive response), have more attention to cues of punishment, and show more avoidance behaviour in response to cues of punishment in the environment.
This means that athletes that do not like a negative feedback/stimulus will adapt their behaviour to avoid this feedback. What does this mean? In simple terms, athletes who are more mentally tough hate losing or making mistakes more than anything else and will quickly adapt their behaviour to avoid this. They will adapt their performance under pressure.
If you are looking to adapt an athletes decision making behavior we suggest applying CSQ mode to cognitive tasks within your athletes cognitive training program.
What does Consequence (CSQ) mode look like?
When an athlete makes an error the timer bar turns red and extends the task time by 15 seconds.
When to use Consequence mode
When you want to focus on increasing an athlete's mental toughness.
What happens if they make another mistake when the bar is red?
The red bar will extend the task duration by another 15s.
Can I see how many mistakes my athlete makes during a task and how many CSQ penalties were applied?
Yes, Soma Analytics will display how many 15s CSQs were given for the task.
Consequence mode is designed to modify an athlete's decision-making behaviour and increase their mental toughness and punishment sensitivity by giving time penalties for every incorrect response.
Mental Toughness Research
Study: A Neuropsychological Model of Mentally Tough Behavior
Four studies were conducted with two primary objectives: (a) to conceptualize and measure mental toughness from a behavioral perspective and (b) to apply relevant personality theory to the examination of between-person differences in mentally tough behavior. Studies 1 (N = 305 participants from a range of different sports) and 2 (N = 110 high-level cricketers) focused on the development of an informant-rated mental toughness questionnaire that assessed individual differences in ability to maintain or enhance performance under pressure from a wide range of stressors. Studies 3 (N = 214) and 4 (N = 196) examined the relationship between reinforcement sensitivities and mentally tough behavior in high-level cricketers. The highest levels of mental toughness reported by coaches occurred when cricketers were sensitive to punishment and insensitive to reward. Study 4 suggested that such players are predisposed to identify threatening stimuli early, which gives them the best possible opportunity to prepare an effective response to the pressurized environments they encounter. The findings show that high-level cricketers who are punishment sensitive, but not reward sensitive, detect threat early and can maintain goal-directed behavior under pressure from a range of different stressors.
Study: The effects of punishment and reward sensitivities on mental toughness and performance in swimming.
The purpose of the current study was to examine the interactive effects of punishment and reward sensitivity in predicting Mentally Tough behaviour and performance in swimming. First, we validated a measure of MT behaviour in a mixed sample of competitive swimmers and then examined the interactive effects of punishment and reward sensitivities in predicting MT behaviour. A second purpose of the study was to examine whether punishment and reward sensitivities can account for race time performance. Results found significant interactions between reward and punishment sensitivity across both studies. That is, as punishment sensitivity increased MT and race times improved when reward sensitivity was low. However, both decreased when reward sensitivity was high. Results add to previous research showing that athletes who are sensitive to punishment and insensitive to reward display stronger MT behaviours and as a consequence, swim faster.
Study: The Benefit of Punishment Sensitivity On Motor Performance Under Pressure.
Objective: Humans are often required to perform demanding cognitive and motor tasks under pressure. However, in such environments there is considerable inter-individual variability in the ability to successfully execute actions. Here, we consider how individual differences in self-reported sensitivity to punishment influence skilled motor performance under pressure and whether this relationship is moderated by the temporal detection of threat. Method: Across two studies, one hundred and sixty UK participants (Study 1, n = 80, MAge = 21.6, 52 Males; Study 2, n = 80, MAge = 24.95, 45 Males) performed a precision-grip task and received either early or late warning of an upcoming stressful manipulation involving social evaluation and performance-dependent incentives. Results: In both studies, we report an interaction where punishment sensitivity was adaptive for motor performance only when threats were detected early and there was opportunity to prepare for the upcoming stressor. Further, our results suggest that the benefits of punishment sensitivity are likely underpinned by the effective use of cognitive strategies. Conclusion: Heightened sensitivity to punishment is adaptive for performance under pressure, provided threats are detected early and effective cognitive strategies are implemented.