IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v105y2024i4p1296-1307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in the determinants of choking under pressure: Evidence from penalty kicks in soccer

Author

Listed:
  • Ricardo Manuel Santos

Abstract

Objective In this article, we aim to determine whether there are gender differences about the importance of psychological pressure at the time of the penalty kick event in soccer. Soccer is a formidable framework because it is easier to disentangle the psychological aspects from clearly observable actions, strategies, and outcomes. We are interested in identifying whether there is choking under pressure, a phenomenon characterized by individuals performing worse than they would under the absence of factors that trigger stress. Methods Four different pressure mechanisms are considered and tested using data from all 494 penalty kicks in the top male and female soccer tournament. Results Our findings show that the stress mechanisms considered affect scoring rates; however, we fail to identify statistically significant differences by gender. Conclusion Therefore, the design of programs aimed to help choking‐prone individuals should not over‐emphasize gender differences in this setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo Manuel Santos, 2024. "Gender differences in the determinants of choking under pressure: Evidence from penalty kicks in soccer," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1296-1307, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:4:p:1296-1307
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13415
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13415?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:4:p:1296-1307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.