Psychological aspects

Competitive Performance of Elite Weightlifters and the Features of Their Neurodynamics

V. A. Salnikov, Cand. Sc. (Pedagogy), Associate Professor; B. V. Kimeysha, Cand. Sc. (Pedagogy), Omsk; A. M. Nikitin, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky

English summary of Tyazhelaya Atletika. Ezhegodnik 1983 (Moscow: Fizkultura i Sport, 1983), pp. 43–47: the text is paraphrased, not translated; data tables are given in full with English labels.

Aim and method

Aim: to relate lifters' behaviour at competitions to nervous-system typology and psychomotor traits. Earlier work (V. D. Nebylitsyn 1966; O. A. Sirotin and Yu. A. Khudadov 1971; A. N. Vorobyov, V. A. Polyakov and V. M. Rusalov 1977) linked these traits to emotional stability under stress.
Subjects: 63 lifters from the trade-union sports societies, aged 18–27, ranging from 1st class to Master of Sport. They were followed for 1.5 years.
Recorded at meets:
- competition result vs training result;
- previous result vs the result planned for the next meet;
- previous result vs the next opening weight;
- achieved vs planned result;
- warm-up sets and lifts;
- successful attempts, by importance of the meet;
- the size of the first increment.
Traits:
- E. P. Ilyin's (1972) typology: strength for excitation, mobility of excitation and of inhibition, and external and internal balance;
- Mira y López's (1958) psychomotor traits: tone, extra-/introversion, aggressiveness, emotional lability and anxiety.
Differences were tested with the Wilcoxon test.

Findings

Matching training results:
- Lifters who beat their training results at meets had high psychomotor tone and lability, less mobile excitation, and excitation predominant or balance on the external balance.
- Those who fell short had low tone and lability (p < 0.05), inert inhibition, and balance on both balances.
Planning: lifters with a strong nervous system and inert excitation and inhibition planned higher results. Those with mobile excitation planned lower. Psychomotor traits made no significant difference.
Opening weight:
- Heavier openers went with low tone, low aggressiveness and lability, higher anxiety, predominant inhibition and inert inhibition.
- Lighter openers went with high tone, aggressiveness and lability, low anxiety, a strong nervous system, external balance, and predominant internal excitation.

Table 1. Competition behaviour of weightlifters vs psychomotor personality traits (% of cases)

Psychomotor trait	Competition vs training result		Previous competition result vs result planned for the next		Previous competition result vs opening weight at the next		Achieved vs planned result
Psychomotor trait	competition result higher than training	competition result lower than training	planned result higher than competition result	planned result lower than competition result	opening weight higher than competition result	opening weight lower than competition result	plan fulfilled	plan not fulfilled
Psychomotor tone	56	70	67	65	60	69	71	62
Extra-/introversion	44	47	46	44	47	45	48	48
Aggressiveness	47	47	47	48	43	49	51	45
Emotional lability	59	65	62	63	61	66	66	61
Anxiety	41	44	45	43	50	24	44	46

Figures as printed. The psychomotor-tone and lability values in the first two columns run opposite to the text's description (higher for the "competition result lower" group), so a column swap in the original cannot be ruled out.

Table 2. Competition behaviour of weightlifters vs typological nervous-system features (% of cases)

Nervous-system property	Level	Competition vs training result		Previous competition result vs result planned for the next		Previous competition result vs opening weight at the next		Achieved vs planned result
Nervous-system property	Level	competition higher than training	competition lower than training	planned higher than competition	planned lower than competition	opening weight higher than competition	opening weight lower than competition	plan fulfilled	plan not fulfilled
Strength of the nervous system	High	58	41	68	50	43	60	50	64
Strength of the nervous system	Low	42	59	32	50	57	40	45	36
Mobility of excitation	High	33	50	19	81	50	35	63	46
Mobility of excitation	Low	67	50	81	29	60	65	37	54
Mobility of inhibition	High	50	25	16	43	24	37	50	22
Mobility of inhibition	Low	50	75	84	57	76	63	50	78
External balance of excitation and inhibition	Excitation predominant	33	—	17	12	28	11	23	18
	Balanced	33	57	33	55	—	56	33	—
	Inhibition predominant	34	43	50	33	72	33	44	82
Internal balance of excitation and inhibition	Excitation predominant	50	29	33	50	—	50	57	—
	Balanced	50	57	50	50	50	50	43	60
	Inhibition predominant	—	14	17	—	50	—	—	40

Figures as printed. A few High/Low pairs do not add up to 100 (mobility of excitation: 81 + 29 and 50 + 60; strength: 50 + 45), which points to misprints in the original that cannot be corrected with certainty.

Warm-up:
- Typically 6–8 sets and 10–15 lifts before the snatch, 5–7 sets and 9–12 lifts before the clean & jerk.
- Low-aggressiveness, extra-/introverted and inert-inhibition lifters take more snatch sets.
- Inert-inhibition lifters do more lifts, and high-tone lifters do more clean & jerk lifts (both p < 0.05).
Productivity of attempts (p < 0.05):
- At minor meets, lifters with a weak nervous system and high tone were most productive.
- At major meets, those with high extra-/introversion scores and low lability were.
- Productivity falls as meets get more important, most steeply with a weak nervous system, inert excitation, inhibition predominant on the external balance, high tone and high anxiety. At major meets these groups no longer differ significantly.
First increment: larger increments with a weak nervous system (snatch only), and with inert excitation or low aggressiveness (both lifts, p < 0.05).

Table 3. Productivity of attempts at competitions by personality traits of the lifters

Rank of competition	Strength of the nervous system (excitation)		Mobility of excitation		External balance of excitation and inhibition		Psychomotor tone		Anxiety
Rank of competition	high	low	high	low	excitation predominant	inhibition predominant	high	low	high	low
Less important	3.8	4.3	4.1	4.2	4.0	4.2	4.4	3.9	4.0	4.4
Important	3.9	3.6	3.8	3.6	3.8	3.6	3.5	3.9	3.7	3.6

Values are presumably the mean number of successful attempts out of six. The text links the sharpest drop to high anxiety, but the printed columns show the larger drop under "low" anxiety, so the two anxiety columns may be swapped in the original.

Interpretation and conclusions

Favourable traits:
- mobile excitation — decisiveness and realistic self-assessment (I. P. Petyaykin 1975; N. E. Vysotskaya 1975);
- sometimes inert excitation — persistence (M. I. Ilyina 1975);
- external excitation predominance — boldness (N. D. Skryabin 1972), linked with aggressiveness (V. A. Salnikov 1980);
- balanced processes — concentration;
- internal excitation predominance — motor activity (E. P. Ilyin 1974);
- high psychomotor tone — skill control under stress and confidence;
- high aggressiveness.
Less favourable traits:
- a strong nervous system — risk-taking and over-ambitious plans that often fail;
- inert inhibition — part of the "timidity" complex (Ilyin 1976);
- predominant inhibition — indecision;
- low tone — compensated by opening too heavy;
- low aggressiveness.
Traits can compensate for one another (V. V. Belous 1981). Knowing each lifter's profile helps coaches plan his preparation and attempts.