Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS)

Abstract

The Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS) is a widely utilized 21-item psychometric instrument designed to assess multidimensional individual differences in competitive trait anxiety among athletes. Developed by Ronald E. Smith, Frank L. Smoll, and Robert W. Schutz in 1990, the scale emerged to address the theoretical and operational limitations of unidimensional competitive anxiety inventories such as the Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT). Rooted in cognitive-affective and multidimensional anxiety frameworks, the SAS measures anxiety as a multidimensional disposition encompassing one autonomic/physiological domain and two distinct cognitive domains. Specifically, the instrument is divided into three distinct subscales: Somatic Trait Anxiety (9 items), Worry (7 items), and Concentration Disruption (5 items). Respondents rate their typical pre-competitive and competitive cognitive and somatic reactions using a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Not At All) to 4 (Very Much So).

Extensive psychometric investigations have established that the SAS exhibits robust internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically ranging from .82 to .88 for Somatic Anxiety, .78 to .86 for Worry, and .70 to .79 for Concentration Disruption across diverse collegiate, high school, and recreational athletic cohorts. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) consistently supports its tripartite structural configuration over unidimensional alternatives. The scale displays strong convergent and concurrent validity through robust associations with general trait anxiety, social physique anxiety, state performance anxiety, and objective athletic performance decrements under high-stress conditions. In both clinical sports neuropsychology and applied sport performance optimization, the SAS serves as a foundational diagnostic and empirical tool for isolating performance-debilitating cognitive intrusions from autonomic hyperarousal, thereby informing individualized psychological skills training interventions.

Keywords

Sport Anxiety Scale, competitive trait anxiety, somatic anxiety, cognitive anxiety, worry, concentration disruption, performance anxiety, psychometrics, athlete assessment, sports psychology

Authors

The Sport Anxiety Scale was conceptualized, developed, and empirically validated by a team of prominent researchers in sport psychology and measurement theory:

• Ronald E. Smith, Ph.D. — Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. Dr. Smith is an internationally recognized authority in clinical sports psychology, cognitive-behavioral intervention models, and the measurement of athletic stress, coping, and youth sport development.
• Frank L. Smoll, Ph.D. — Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. Dr. Smoll has conducted pioneering investigations into coach-athlete interactions, parent involvement in youth athletics, and competitive stress reduction mechanisms.
• Robert W. Schutz, Ph.D. — Professor Emeritus of Measurement and Statistics in the School of Kinesiology at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Dr. Schutz is an expert in psychometrics, longitudinal statistical modeling, and experimental design in human kinetics.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS) is to capture and quantify the multidimensional nature of competitive trait anxiety—defined as a relatively stable individual predisposition to perceive competitive athletic environments as threatening and to respond to them with elevated levels of state anxiety. Prior to the development of the SAS, prevailing assessment protocols in sport psychology relied predominantly on unidimensional measures, most notably Rainer Martens’ Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT; Martens, 1977). Although the SCAT significantly advanced the understanding of sport-specific stress, it operationalized competitive anxiety largely as a single-factor construct dominated by somatic symptoms, obscuring important clinical and qualitative nuances between cognitive and somatic manifestations.

In applied and competitive athletic settings, diagnosing the precise nature of an athlete’s anxiety profile is critical for several key reasons:

• Differential Intervention Planning: Somatic hyperarousal and cognitive disruption require distinct therapeutic modalities. An athlete exhibiting elevated Somatic Anxiety typically benefits from somatic relaxation techniques such as diaphragmatic breathing, progressive muscle relaxation (PMR), or biofeedback. Conversely, an athlete suffering from high Worry or Concentration Disruption requires cognitive interventions such as cognitive restructuring, rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), attentional cueing, mindfulness-based focus training, or pre-performance routines.
• Predicting Athletic ‘Choking’: Cognitive anxiety—specifically concentration disruption and performance-related worry—has been shown to have a more directly debilitating effect on motor skill automaticity, working memory capacity, and reaction times than general somatic arousal. The SAS enables coaches, sports psychiatrists, and performance consultants to identify individuals vulnerable to choking under pressure before critical competitive events.
• Empirical Research and Screening: The SAS provides sport science researchers with a standardized, psychometrically grounded instrument to test complex theoretical models, including catastrophe models, processing efficiency theories, and the interaction effects between trait dispositions and real-time state reactivity during training and competition.

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct evaluated by the Sport Anxiety Scale is multidimensional competitive trait anxiety. Consistent with contemporary clinical neuroscience and cognitive psychology, anxiety is not considered a uniform affective state but rather an intricate constellation of autonomic, subjective-cognitive, and attentional processes. The SAS operationalizes this construct across three core subscales:

1. Somatic Trait Anxiety

The Somatic Trait Anxiety dimension (comprising 9 items) reflects an athlete’s tendency to perceive and react with physiological and autonomic hyperarousal in competitive contexts. This subscale measures subjective awareness of visceral autonomic activity, including sympathetic nervous system activation. Manifestations tapped by this dimension include:

• Elevated heart rate and cardiovascular acceleration (e.g., heart pounding, racing).
• Gastrointestinal distress and visceral dysregulation (e.g., upset stomach, sinking sensations).
• Skeletal muscle tension, tremors, and motor shakiness (e.g., trembling, bodily tightness).
• Generalized bodily feelings of nervousness and agitation.

2. Worry

The Worry dimension (comprising 7 items) evaluates the cognitive-evaluative component of competitive anxiety. It reflects an athlete’s recurring preoccupation with prospective failure, self-doubts, and the negative consequences of an inadequate performance. This subscale specifically taps into:

• Apprehension regarding athletic failure and failing to achieve competitive goals.
• Concerns about “choking” under high-stakes competitive pressure.
• Fear of negative social evaluation, specifically letting down teammates, coaches, family members, or supporters.
• Intrusive self-critical assessments and pervasive self-doubts regarding one’s physical capabilities.

3. Concentration Disruption

The Concentration Disruption dimension (comprising 5 items) represents the cognitive-attentional deficit component of performance anxiety. While Worry represents ruminative negative evaluation, Concentration Disruption reflects an involuntary loss of attentional control, disruption of selective attention, and lapses in task-relevant focus caused by emotional distress. Behaviors captured by this subscale include:

• Intrusive, task-irrelevant thoughts that actively impede processing speed.
• Attentional drift and mind-wandering during actual physical competition.
• Inability to maintain narrow or broad external focus on critical environmental cues.
• Transient cognitive freezes or lapses in working memory and immediate decision-making.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the Sport Anxiety Scale is founded upon the evolution of multidimensional anxiety theories in clinical psychology and their subsequent translation into sport sciences.

During the 1970s and 1980s, psychometricians and clinical theorists such as Richard Davidson, Gary Schwartz, and Michael Morris demonstrated that general anxiety splits into distinct physiological (somatic) and cognitive (mental) subsystems. Rainer Martens and his colleagues subsequently integrated these findings into the sport domain through the Multidimensional Anxiety Theory (MAT; Martens et al., 1990). Under MAT, somatic anxiety was conceptualized as following an inverted-U relationship with motor performance, wherein moderate physiological arousal can facilitate motor output up to an optimal threshold. Cognitive anxiety, conversely, was hypothesized to exhibit a monotonic negative linear relationship with athletic performance, wherein increases in negative self-talk, worry, and doubt progressively degrade motor execution and decision-making accuracy.

The development of the SAS by Smith, Smoll, and Schutz (1990) expanded the cognitive dimension of MAT. Drawing upon empirical factor analyses and cognitive psychology paradigms, the authors observed that cognitive anxiety is not homogeneous; rather, it differentiates into an evaluative cognitive component (Worry) and an attentional control component (Concentration Disruption). This distinction mirrors subsequent advancements in cognitive science, such as Michael Eysenck’s Attentional Control Theory (ACT; Eysenck et al., 2007) and Processing Efficiency Theory (PET; Eysenck & Calvo, 1992).

According to these theoretical paradigms, anxiety consumes finite central executive working memory resources. Worry represents verbal rumination that usurps working memory capacity, whereas concentration disruption reflects the observable breakdown of the attentional orienting and inhibition networks. By explicitly partitioning somatic arousal, evaluative worry, and attentional disruption, the SAS provides a theoretical lens that bridges clinical psychopathology, cognitive neuroscience, and performance kinetics.

Validity

The validity of the Sport Anxiety Scale has been rigorously examined across numerous cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental psychometric investigations:

Construct and Structural Validity

During the initial validation of the SAS, Smith, Smoll, and Schutz (1990) conducted comprehensive exploratory factor analyses on athlete samples totaling over 1,200 high school and collegiate participants. The three-factor solution (Somatic Anxiety, Worry, Concentration Disruption) consistently accounted for substantial variance and demonstrated clean structural patterns. Subsequent confirmatory factor analytic studies by independent international investigators have repeatedly affirmed the three-factor oblique model over unidimensional or orthogonal two-factor models.

Convergent and Concurrent Validity

The SAS exhibits strong convergent associations with established clinical and sport-specific anxiety measures:

• Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT): The SAS Somatic Anxiety subscale correlates strongly with the unidimensional SCAT (correlations typically ranging from r = .63 to .72), confirming that SCAT primarily evaluated physiological tension. The Worry subscale displays moderate-to-high correlations with SCAT (r = .50 to .62), while Concentration Disruption correlates moderately (r = .40 to .51).
• State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-T): Correlations between the SAS subscales and general trait anxiety (Spielberger STAI A-Trait) range from .45 to .60, demonstrating that while the SAS shares variance with generalized neuroticism/trait anxiety, it accounts for substantial unique variance specific to athletic evaluative threat.
• Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2): In pre-competition assessments, the SAS trait subscales strongly predict corresponding pre-event state anxiety scores measured by the CSAI-2.

Criterion and Predictive Validity

Predictive validity has been demonstrated through objective performance metrics and injury vulnerability research. Longitudinal studies have shown that high baseline scores on the Concentration Disruption and Worry subscales predict drops in shooting accuracy among basketball players, lower stroke consistency among tennis players, and elevated rates of athletic injury across contact sports over competitive seasons—largely due to attentional narrowing and elevated neuromuscular bracing.

Reliability

The Sport Anxiety Scale exhibits robust classical psychometric reliability indices across varied athletic disciplines, competitive tiers, and demographic categories.

Internal Consistency

In the seminal validation investigations published by Smith et al. (1990), internal consistency estimates (Cronbach’s alpha) demonstrated satisfactory to excellent homogeneity across all three subscales:

• Somatic Trait Anxiety (9 items): Reliability coefficients typically range between α = .82 and α = .88.
• Worry (7 items): Reliability coefficients consistently fall between α = .78 and α = .86.
• Concentration Disruption (5 items): Reliability coefficients range between α = .70 and α = .79. (Due to having the fewest items, slightly lower alphas are observed, yet they remain consistently above established psychometric thresholds for short scales).
• Total Scale (21 items): Overall composite reliability frequently exceeds α = .90.

Test-Retest Stability

Because trait anxiety represents a stable behavioral disposition, test-retest reliability is essential. In temporal stability assessments conducted over intervals ranging from 1 to 7 weeks among collegiate athletes, test-retest correlation coefficients remained robust:

• Somatic Anxiety: r = .71 to .84
• Worry: r = .74 to .87
• Concentration Disruption: r = .68 to .78

These values demonstrate that the SAS captures enduring, trait-like emotional dispositions rather than transient, momentary state fluctuations.

Factor Analysis

The dimensional architecture of the Sport Anxiety Scale was established through iterative exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmed through advanced confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) protocols.

Exploratory Factor Structure

In initial scale construction, Smith et al. (1990) evaluated large pools of candidate items using principal axes factor extraction with both orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations. The scree test and eigenvalue criteria clearly identified three dominant factors that accounted for the underlying item covariance. Factor loadings for designated items exceeded .45 on their primary theoretical factor, with minimal secondary cross-loadings (consistently < .25), establishing distinct factor independence while acknowledging moderate latent factor intercorrelations.

Confirmatory Factor Analytic Fit

Subsequent psychometric evaluations across varied competitive samples (e.g., collegiate NCAA athletes, elite international competitors, high school squads) evaluated alternative models, comparing a unidimensional model, a two-factor model (somatic vs. global cognitive), and the hypothesized three-factor oblique model. The three-factor model consistently achieved superior goodness-of-fit indices:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values typically range from .91 to .96 across validation studies, surpassing the acceptable .90 threshold.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI / NNFI): Values consistently range between .90 and .95.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Ranges between .045 and .068, falling well within the standard < .08 cut-off indicative of good model fit.
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Observed values generally remain below .06.

Latent factor intercorrelations within CFA solutions demonstrate that Somatic Anxiety and Worry correlate moderately (r ≈ .50 to .62), Somatic Anxiety and Concentration Disruption correlate moderately (r ≈ .42 to .54), and Worry and Concentration Disruption correlate moderately (r ≈ .48 to .58). These values verify that while the three subscales share common variance associated with general competitive threat appraisal, each represents an empirically separable construct.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The structural characteristics, administration guidelines, and scoring mechanisms of the Sport Anxiety Scale are outlined below:

• Instrument Designation: Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS).
• Construct Assessed: Multidimensional Competitive Trait Anxiety.
• Target Population: Adolescent and adult competitive athletes (ranging from high school to elite/professional tiers).
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire or computerized self-report inventory.
• Item Count: 21 items.
• Completion Time: Approximately 4 to 8 minutes.
• Response Format: 4-point Likert-type scale:
  • 1 = Not At All
  • 2 = Somewhat
  • 3 = Moderately So
  • 4 = Very Much So
• Subscale Item Allocation:
  • Somatic Trait Anxiety (9 items): Items 1, 4, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, 19, 21.
  • Worry (7 items): Items 3, 5, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18.
  • Concentration Disruption (5 items): Items 2, 6, 7, 14, 20.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • All 21 items are scored positively (1 to 4). There are no reverse-coded items.
  • Somatic Anxiety Score: Sum of the 9 somatic items (Theoretical range: 9 to 36). Higher scores denote elevated physiological arousal and bodily tension.
  • Worry Score: Sum of the 7 worry items (Theoretical range: 7 to 28). Higher scores indicate heightened fear of failure and negative evaluation.
  • Concentration Disruption Score: Sum of the 5 concentration disruption items (Theoretical range: 5 to 20). Higher scores reflect greater vulnerability to attentional lapses during play.
  • Total Score: Sum of all 21 items (Theoretical range: 21 to 84). While a total score can be computed to index overall competitive anxiety, researchers and practitioners strongly advise reporting and interpreting individual subscale profiles to preserve multidimensional diagnostic precision.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original Sport Anxiety Scale (SAS) was published in 1990 by Ronald E. Smith, Frank L. Smoll, and Robert W. Schutz in the academic journal Anxiety Research. The instrument is considered an open psychometric assessment for non-commercial educational, scientific, and applied clinical research purposes, provided that proper academic attribution and bibliographic citation are given to the original authors.

No user fees or royalty licensing charges are required for individual sport psychologists, coaches, or university researchers administering the standard scale for empirical investigations or athletic performance profiling. However, commercial distribution, inclusion in monetized commercial software platforms, or publication within fee-based diagnostic testing batteries requires formal copyright permission from the original copyright holders and publishers. In 2006, Smith, Smoll, Cumming, and Grossbard developed an updated 15-item revision, the Sport Anxiety Scale-2 (SAS-2), designed to achieve structural equivalence across child, adolescent, and adult athletes.

References

• Davidson, R. J., & Schwartz, G. E. (1976). The psychobiology of relaxation and related states: A multi-process theory of activation, consciousness, and attention. In D. I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Behavior control and modification of physiological activity (pp. 399–419). Prentice-Hall.
• Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition & Emotion, 6(6), 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208409696
• Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 7(2), 336–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336
• Martens, R. (1977). Sport Competition Anxiety Test. Human Kinetics Publishers.
• Martens, R., Vealey, R. S., & Burton, D. (1990). Competitive anxiety in sport. Human Kinetics Publishers.
• Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., & Schutz, R. W. (1990). Measurement and correlates of sport-specific cognitive and somatic trait anxiety: The Sport Anxiety Scale. Anxiety Research, 2(4), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/08917779008248733
• Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., Cumming, S. P., & Grossbard, J. R. (2006). Measurement of multidimensional sport performance anxiety in children and adults: The Sport Anxiety Scale-2. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 28(4), 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.28.4.479
• Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., & Cumming, S. P. (2007). Effects of a motivational climate intervention for coaches on young athletes’ sport performance anxiety. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29(1), 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.29.1.39

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)