International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2015, 10, 137-138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/IJSPP.2015-0017 © 2015 Human Kinetics, Inc.
www.IJSPP-Journal.com EDITORIAL
When Failure Is Not an Option: Creating Excellence in Sport Through Insights From Special Forces Sport presents elite athletes with numerous physical and psychological challenges. According to Professor Vincent Walsh,1 only a soldier in combat is presented with a more challenging activity for the human brain. Both sport and combat require physical preparation, mental focus, and emotional control. While success in sport can result in social recognition, financial gain, and a sense of selfachievement, success for elite soldiers is linked to achieving mission objectives while at the same time remaining functional and avoiding casualties. Given the demands placed on elite soldiers, the high-stress environment in which they perform, the intense training and selection processes they endure, and ultimately the consequences of failure, it is highly likely that the elite sport community can benefit from understanding different aspects of selecting and preparing Special Forces soldiers. At the very least, a comparison of these 2 elite groups may help us understand characteristics that may exemplify excellence. There are a number of similarities between Special Forces (SF) soldiers and elite athletes with respect to physiological characteristics. SF soldiers (US Navy SEALs) have been reported to have high aerobic capacities (VO2 62 mL · kg–1 · min–1), as well as high muscle strength, power, and endurance.2,3 However, while elite athletes are likely to have fitness characteristics that are specific to their sport, SF soldiers have a broader array of attributes dictated by the complex and demanding environment in which they may be required to operate. One primary difference in preparation and development of SF soldiers is that there is not a clear timeline associated with when they will be called into action. Athletes are able to plan their training cycle for predetermined competitions, while SF soldiers are expected to cycle through different states of readiness for deployment. While scientific data comparing the neurophysiology of elite athletes and elite soldiers do not exist (or are not available), some interesting data from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG) suggest that there may be some similarities in areas of brain functioning related to cognitive flexibility—being able to deal with stressful and complex situations. In an examination of psychophysiological refinement in world-class Norwegian athletes, Harung et al4 demonstrated that world-class athletes (top 10 places in Olympic Games, World Championships, or World Cups for at least 3 seasons) had higher brain functioning than athletes who had been training for a similar amount of time yet were not considered world-class.4 Using EEG, the authors reported that the world-class athletes had higher scores on the Brain Integration Scale, calculated from EEG scores during paired reaction-time tasks. This may be considered important for athletes in terms of perception, planning, strategizing, and motor performance; remaining calm and alert to adapt to changes in the environment; and better matching between task demand and brain activation.4 The ability for the brain to be flexible and adaptable in highstress situations is a critical attribute of SF soldiers. Researchers have used fMRI to examine Navy SEALs, and results demonstrated that the SEALs, rather than reacting to a stress, were able to quickly and effectively shift their focus of attention, suggestive of an efficient and flexible brain.5 Therefore, both elite athletes and
elite soldiers may demonstrate superior brain functioning partly explaining how these individuals both cope and function at very high levels in challenging situations. Another domain in which some similarities exist between elite soldiers and elite athletes is the psychology-related phenomena that underpin performance. While the sources of stress may be vastly different in these groups, some of the protective psychological factors used to deal with such stressors may be similar. Sarkar and Fletcher6 describe the 5 main families of psychological factors that the best athletes use to cope with adversity. These include positive personality, motivation, confidence, focus, and perceived social support.6 The resiliency characteristics of Navy SEALs that enable them to perform in extreme situations and environments have been described as innovation, decisive action, interpersonal connectedness and support, integrity, self-discipline and self-control, and optimism and positive thinking.7 While there are some clear similarities between elite athletes and elite soldiers, there are also a number of important differences. One of the fundamental contrasts is the way that athletes and soldiers are identified and selected. Traditionally, most athletes are identified as having “talent” via assessments of current performance, fitness, anthropometric indicators, and skill. It is less common to assess psychological characteristics and the ability to function and perform under highly stressful conditions. While publically available literature on the specific details outlining how elite soldiers are selected is scarce, in the military the process is a combination of several critical aspects: physical resiliency, willingness to work within a team above oneself, an absence of self-doubt, and good character. Research in athletes has indicated that they are driven by many personal goals and display self-determined motivation.8 External rewards such as money and social recognition may lead to an enhanced perception of competence, which increases selfdetermined motivation.8 While multiple motivators also exist in SF soldiers, the anonymous nature of their work means that most are driven primarily by intrinsic motivation. While external factors including money are not entirely overlooked by the SF community, remuneration in comparison to the risks undertaken is incongruent. However, the willingness to take on the risk is rewarded in other ways. Protection of family and peers, national pride for the country of origin, belief that a duty exists, and, for some, a higher belief of divinity can be important motivators. It is becoming increasingly common for media outlets to report on elite athletes, particularly professional team-sport athletes, being involved in criminal activity, whether that be drugs (illicit or performance enhancing), alcohol, violence, or gender violence. Whether the incidence of bad behavior is more or less than in the general population is debated. Regardless, the consequences for the reputation of the athlete and the image of elite sport can be severe. Furthermore, moral disengagement has been linked to the risk of doping.9 Given that integrity, or doing the right thing, is a key characteristic of SF soldiers, elite sport may benefit from SF perspectives. 137
Downloaded by University Library Utrecht on 09/23/16, Volume 10, Article Number 2
138 Halson and Nichols
Perhaps the manner in which appropriate disciplinary action occurs (or does not occur) also influences poor behavior in athletes. While the disciplinary response to poor behavior or even illegal activity is likely highly variable across sports, providing appropriate and consistent action is necessary. In the SF community there is a very wide range of consequences, depending on the offense. In relation to drug use of any kind, a zero-tolerance policy exists. Not only is the person removed from the military, oftentimes the service member will receive a dishonorable discharge, and there is a possibility of federal prison time. Ultimately, coaches, support staff, and individuals in leadership roles in sport should protect and support athletes and provide them with an appropriate duty of care. To achieve this we should use bestpractice selection methodologies, support the athletes both physically and psychologically, promote personal responsibility, and provide appropriate discipline and consequences in a consistent manner. While the military may lack the sophistication of elite sport with regard to the scientific approach and development of SF soldiers’ training and physiology, there are other aspects of the SF community that elite sport may benefit from. In the athletic world, there may be deficiencies in identifying athletes with a superior desire for excellence and an ability to display discipline. It is notable that elite athletes and SF soldiers may lack exactly what the other possesses in abundance. Bridging this gap may help attain objectives for both athletes and elite soldiers—highly functional, resilient, moral, and versatile elite performers. Shona L Halson, Australian Institute of Sport, Australian Catholic University Jeffery G. Nichols, former Navy SEAL, Virginia High Performance LLC
References 1. Walsh V. Is sport the brain’s biggest challenge? Curr Biol. 2014;24(18):R859–R860. 2. Flanagan SC, Kotwal RS, Forsten RD. Preparing soldiers for the stress of combat. J Spec Oper Med. 2012;12(2):33–41. 3. O’Hara R, Henry A, Serres J, Russell D, Locke R. Operational stressors on physical performance in special operators and countermeasures to improve performance: a review of the literature. J Spec Oper Med. 2014;14(1):67–78. 4. Harung HS, Travis F, Pensgaard AM, Boes R, Cook-Greuter S, Daley K. Higher psycho-physiological refinement in world-class Norwegian athletes: brain measures of performance capacity. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011;21(1):32–41. 5. Simmons AN, Fitzpatrick S, Strigo IA, et al. Altered insula activation in anticipation of changing emotional states: neural mechanisms underlying cognitive flexibility in Special Operations Forces personnel. Neuroreport. 2012;23(4):234–239. 6. Sarkar M, Fletcher D. Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(15):1419–1434. 7. Everly GS, Jr, McCormack DK, Strouse DA. Seven characteristics of highly resilient people: insights from Navy SEALs to the “greatest generation.” Int J Emerg Ment Health. 2012;14(2):87–93. 8. Mallett C, Hanrahan S. Elite athletes: why does the ‘fire’ burn so brightly? Psychol Sport Exerc. 2004;5:183–200. 9. Kirby K, Moran A, Guerin S. A qualitative analysis of the experiences of elite athletes who have admitted to doping for performance enhancement. Int J Sport Policy Politics. 2011;3(2):205–224.
www.IJSPP-Journal.com EDITORIAL
When Failure Is Not an Option: Creating Excellence in Sport Through Insights From Special Forces Sport presents elite athletes with numerous physical and psychological challenges. According to Professor Vincent Walsh,1 only a soldier in combat is presented with a more challenging activity for the human brain. Both sport and combat require physical preparation, mental focus, and emotional control. While success in sport can result in social recognition, financial gain, and a sense of selfachievement, success for elite soldiers is linked to achieving mission objectives while at the same time remaining functional and avoiding casualties. Given the demands placed on elite soldiers, the high-stress environment in which they perform, the intense training and selection processes they endure, and ultimately the consequences of failure, it is highly likely that the elite sport community can benefit from understanding different aspects of selecting and preparing Special Forces soldiers. At the very least, a comparison of these 2 elite groups may help us understand characteristics that may exemplify excellence. There are a number of similarities between Special Forces (SF) soldiers and elite athletes with respect to physiological characteristics. SF soldiers (US Navy SEALs) have been reported to have high aerobic capacities (VO2 62 mL · kg–1 · min–1), as well as high muscle strength, power, and endurance.2,3 However, while elite athletes are likely to have fitness characteristics that are specific to their sport, SF soldiers have a broader array of attributes dictated by the complex and demanding environment in which they may be required to operate. One primary difference in preparation and development of SF soldiers is that there is not a clear timeline associated with when they will be called into action. Athletes are able to plan their training cycle for predetermined competitions, while SF soldiers are expected to cycle through different states of readiness for deployment. While scientific data comparing the neurophysiology of elite athletes and elite soldiers do not exist (or are not available), some interesting data from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG) suggest that there may be some similarities in areas of brain functioning related to cognitive flexibility—being able to deal with stressful and complex situations. In an examination of psychophysiological refinement in world-class Norwegian athletes, Harung et al4 demonstrated that world-class athletes (top 10 places in Olympic Games, World Championships, or World Cups for at least 3 seasons) had higher brain functioning than athletes who had been training for a similar amount of time yet were not considered world-class.4 Using EEG, the authors reported that the world-class athletes had higher scores on the Brain Integration Scale, calculated from EEG scores during paired reaction-time tasks. This may be considered important for athletes in terms of perception, planning, strategizing, and motor performance; remaining calm and alert to adapt to changes in the environment; and better matching between task demand and brain activation.4 The ability for the brain to be flexible and adaptable in highstress situations is a critical attribute of SF soldiers. Researchers have used fMRI to examine Navy SEALs, and results demonstrated that the SEALs, rather than reacting to a stress, were able to quickly and effectively shift their focus of attention, suggestive of an efficient and flexible brain.5 Therefore, both elite athletes and
elite soldiers may demonstrate superior brain functioning partly explaining how these individuals both cope and function at very high levels in challenging situations. Another domain in which some similarities exist between elite soldiers and elite athletes is the psychology-related phenomena that underpin performance. While the sources of stress may be vastly different in these groups, some of the protective psychological factors used to deal with such stressors may be similar. Sarkar and Fletcher6 describe the 5 main families of psychological factors that the best athletes use to cope with adversity. These include positive personality, motivation, confidence, focus, and perceived social support.6 The resiliency characteristics of Navy SEALs that enable them to perform in extreme situations and environments have been described as innovation, decisive action, interpersonal connectedness and support, integrity, self-discipline and self-control, and optimism and positive thinking.7 While there are some clear similarities between elite athletes and elite soldiers, there are also a number of important differences. One of the fundamental contrasts is the way that athletes and soldiers are identified and selected. Traditionally, most athletes are identified as having “talent” via assessments of current performance, fitness, anthropometric indicators, and skill. It is less common to assess psychological characteristics and the ability to function and perform under highly stressful conditions. While publically available literature on the specific details outlining how elite soldiers are selected is scarce, in the military the process is a combination of several critical aspects: physical resiliency, willingness to work within a team above oneself, an absence of self-doubt, and good character. Research in athletes has indicated that they are driven by many personal goals and display self-determined motivation.8 External rewards such as money and social recognition may lead to an enhanced perception of competence, which increases selfdetermined motivation.8 While multiple motivators also exist in SF soldiers, the anonymous nature of their work means that most are driven primarily by intrinsic motivation. While external factors including money are not entirely overlooked by the SF community, remuneration in comparison to the risks undertaken is incongruent. However, the willingness to take on the risk is rewarded in other ways. Protection of family and peers, national pride for the country of origin, belief that a duty exists, and, for some, a higher belief of divinity can be important motivators. It is becoming increasingly common for media outlets to report on elite athletes, particularly professional team-sport athletes, being involved in criminal activity, whether that be drugs (illicit or performance enhancing), alcohol, violence, or gender violence. Whether the incidence of bad behavior is more or less than in the general population is debated. Regardless, the consequences for the reputation of the athlete and the image of elite sport can be severe. Furthermore, moral disengagement has been linked to the risk of doping.9 Given that integrity, or doing the right thing, is a key characteristic of SF soldiers, elite sport may benefit from SF perspectives. 137
Downloaded by University Library Utrecht on 09/23/16, Volume 10, Article Number 2
138 Halson and Nichols
Perhaps the manner in which appropriate disciplinary action occurs (or does not occur) also influences poor behavior in athletes. While the disciplinary response to poor behavior or even illegal activity is likely highly variable across sports, providing appropriate and consistent action is necessary. In the SF community there is a very wide range of consequences, depending on the offense. In relation to drug use of any kind, a zero-tolerance policy exists. Not only is the person removed from the military, oftentimes the service member will receive a dishonorable discharge, and there is a possibility of federal prison time. Ultimately, coaches, support staff, and individuals in leadership roles in sport should protect and support athletes and provide them with an appropriate duty of care. To achieve this we should use bestpractice selection methodologies, support the athletes both physically and psychologically, promote personal responsibility, and provide appropriate discipline and consequences in a consistent manner. While the military may lack the sophistication of elite sport with regard to the scientific approach and development of SF soldiers’ training and physiology, there are other aspects of the SF community that elite sport may benefit from. In the athletic world, there may be deficiencies in identifying athletes with a superior desire for excellence and an ability to display discipline. It is notable that elite athletes and SF soldiers may lack exactly what the other possesses in abundance. Bridging this gap may help attain objectives for both athletes and elite soldiers—highly functional, resilient, moral, and versatile elite performers. Shona L Halson, Australian Institute of Sport, Australian Catholic University Jeffery G. Nichols, former Navy SEAL, Virginia High Performance LLC
References 1. Walsh V. Is sport the brain’s biggest challenge? Curr Biol. 2014;24(18):R859–R860. 2. Flanagan SC, Kotwal RS, Forsten RD. Preparing soldiers for the stress of combat. J Spec Oper Med. 2012;12(2):33–41. 3. O’Hara R, Henry A, Serres J, Russell D, Locke R. Operational stressors on physical performance in special operators and countermeasures to improve performance: a review of the literature. J Spec Oper Med. 2014;14(1):67–78. 4. Harung HS, Travis F, Pensgaard AM, Boes R, Cook-Greuter S, Daley K. Higher psycho-physiological refinement in world-class Norwegian athletes: brain measures of performance capacity. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011;21(1):32–41. 5. Simmons AN, Fitzpatrick S, Strigo IA, et al. Altered insula activation in anticipation of changing emotional states: neural mechanisms underlying cognitive flexibility in Special Operations Forces personnel. Neuroreport. 2012;23(4):234–239. 6. Sarkar M, Fletcher D. Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(15):1419–1434. 7. Everly GS, Jr, McCormack DK, Strouse DA. Seven characteristics of highly resilient people: insights from Navy SEALs to the “greatest generation.” Int J Emerg Ment Health. 2012;14(2):87–93. 8. Mallett C, Hanrahan S. Elite athletes: why does the ‘fire’ burn so brightly? Psychol Sport Exerc. 2004;5:183–200. 9. Kirby K, Moran A, Guerin S. A qualitative analysis of the experiences of elite athletes who have admitted to doping for performance enhancement. Int J Sport Policy Politics. 2011;3(2):205–224.
