Building a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive drivers of performance under pressure: An international multi-panel Delphi study.

Introduction: The ability to perform optimally under pressure is critical across many occupations, including the military, first responders, and competitive sport. Despite recognition that such performance depends on a range of cognitive factors, how common these factors are across performance domains remains unclear. The current study sought to integrate existing knowledge in the performance field in the form of a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie performance under pressure. Methods: International experts were recruited from four performance domains [(i) Defense; (ii) Competitive Sport; (iii) Civilian High-stakes; and (iv) Performance Neuroscience]. Experts rated constructs from the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework (and several expert-suggested constructs) across successive rounds, until all constructs reached consensus for inclusion or were eliminated. Finally, included constructs were ranked for their relative importance. Results: Sixty-eight experts completed the first Delphi round, with 94% of experts retained by the end of the Delphi process. The following 10 constructs reached consensus across all four panels (in order of overall ranking): (1) Attention; (2) Cognitive Control-Performance Monitoring; (3) Arousal and Regulatory Systems-Arousal; (4) Cognitive Control-Goal Selection, Updating, Representation, and Maintenance; (5) Cognitive Control-Response Selection and Inhibition/Suppression; (6) Working memory-Flexible Updating; (7) Working memory-Active Maintenance; (8) Perception and Understanding of Self-Self-knowledge; (9) Working memory-Interference Control, and (10) Expert-suggested-Shifting. Discussion: Our results identify a set of transdisciplinary neuroscience-informed constructs, validated through expert consensus. This expert consensus is critical to standardizing cognitive assessment and informing mechanism-targeted interventions in the broader field of human performance optimization.

A clustered-randomized controlled trial of a self-reflection resilience-strengthening intervention and novel mediators.

This study tests the efficacy of a unique resilience-strengthening intervention using a clustered-randomized controlled trial. It was hypothesized that the training, which encourages adaptive self-reflection on stressor events and the effectiveness of coping strategies and resources, would exert a positive effect on mental health outcomes via increased reflection and decreased brooding. The trial was conducted during a significant stressor period with a final sample of 204 second-class Officer Cadets from the Royal Military College, Australia. Platoons of Cadets were randomly allocated to either Self-Reflection Resilience Training (SRT; n = 96) or an exposure-matched active control group that received training as usual (i.e., cognitive-behavioral skill development training) and communication skills seminars (n = 108). Compared to the active control group, SRT was more effective at preventing the onset of depression symptoms and promoting stable levels of perceived stress during a period of increased exposure to training stressors, consistent with a resilient trajectory. The Self-Reflection group unexpectedly demonstrated higher anxiety symptoms than the Control group at immediate follow-up, but these symptoms returned to baseline levels at longer term follow-up. In contrast, the Control group experienced increasing anxiety symptoms between immediate and longer term follow-up. Mediation analyses supported an indirect effect of SRT on all three outcome measures via brooding, but not via reflection. This study provides support for the capacity of a practical, sustainable, and scalable intervention based on self-reflection to strengthen resilience in the military training setting. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Strengthening resilience in military officer cadets: A group-randomized controlled trial of coping and emotion regulatory self-reflection training.

OBJECTIVE: This group-randomized control trial examined the efficacy of guided coping and emotion regulatory self-reflection as a means to strengthen resilience by testing the effects of the training on anxiety and depression symptoms and perceived stressor frequency after an intensive stressor period. METHOD: The sample was 226 officer cadets training at the Royal Military College, Australia. Cadets were randomized by platoon to the self-reflection (n = 130) or coping skills training (n = 96). Surveys occurred at 3 time points: baseline, immediately following the final reflective session (4-weeks postbaseline), and longer-term follow-up (3-months postinitial follow-up). RESULTS: There were no significant baseline differences in demographic or outcome variables between the intervention groups. On average, cadets commenced the resilience training with mild depression and anxiety symptoms. Analyses were conducted at the individual-level after exploring group-level effects. No between-groups differences were observed at initial follow-up. At longer-term follow-up, improvements in mental health outcomes were observed for the self-reflection group, compared with the coping skills group, on depression (Cohen's d = 0.55; 95% CI [0.24, 0.86]), anxiety symptoms (Cohen's d = 0.69; 95% CI [0.37, 1.00]), and perceived stressor frequency (Cohen's d = 0.46; 95% CI [0.15, 0.77]). Longitudinal models demonstrated a time by condition interaction for depression and anxiety, but there was only an effect of condition for perceived stressor frequency. Mediation analyses supported an indirect effect of the intervention on both anxiety and depression via perceived stressor frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide initial support for the use of guided self-reflection as an alternative to coping skills approaches to resilience training. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).