Reviewed by Dr. Teralyn Sell
We often talk about pressure as if it produces one predictable problem: people get nervous, then performance falls apart.
That explanation is too blunt to be useful.
Pressure can disrupt performance in at least two very different ways. It can pull attention away from a demanding task. Or it can drive attention too deeply into the mechanics of a skill that normally runs well without conscious supervision.
Those are not the same failure. And they shouldn’t be trained the same way.
When pressure steals the bandwidth you need
Some work depends heavily on working memory: holding several variables in mind, comparing options, updating a plan, noticing what changed, and making a judgment before the window closes.
Think of a clinician sorting incomplete information, an incident commander reallocating resources, or a leader answering a consequential question without the luxury of a long pause.
In this kind of work, pressure can consume cognitive capacity with worry, consequence, and self-monitoring. In an experiment on math performance, people with higher working-memory capacity showed larger pressure-related decrements on the most working-memory-intensive problems. Their usual advantage became more vulnerable precisely because their performance relied on capacity that pressure could crowd. That study is a useful reminder that more capability does not automatically mean more access under demand.
For these tasks, “focus harder” is usually weak advice. The performance question is: what can be made visible, simplified, sequenced, or offloaded before the moment gets expensive?
When pressure makes you overcontrol what you know
Other skills are procedural. You’ve practiced them enough that you don’t execute every component with deliberate, step-by-step thought. A well-trained physical skill can work this way. So can elements of communication, assessment, and rapid pattern recognition.
Under scrutiny, people may start inspecting the machinery: hand position, wording, timing, the exact sequence. That attention can be counterproductive. Research on skilled golf putting found that pressure hurt performance in a way consistent with excessive conscious monitoring of a proceduralized skill. The broader point is not about golf. It’s that expertise often depends on knowing when not to interfere with a well-built process.
In those moments, a useful cue is often external and outcome-relevant: the target, the next read, the person in front of you, the decision criterion. Not a forensic review of your own mechanics.
The distinction matters because real work is mixed
Most high-demand roles move between both modes. A firefighter may need deliberate reasoning while reading a changing scene, then automatic execution in a practiced maneuver. A quarterback reads, decides, and then throws. A surgeon interprets new information while relying on highly rehearsed technical actions.
That is why generic pressure training misses the mark. “Stay calm” doesn’t tell you whether the task needs more structure or less self-interference.
The better question is more precise: When the stakes rise, where does my attention go, and is that where this task needs it?
Performance training gets more useful when we stop treating pressure as a single enemy. Sometimes it creates too much noise. Sometimes it makes us grab the controls too tightly. Accessing skill under demand starts with knowing the difference.
Dr. Teralyn Sell, PhD, LPC, NCC
Psychotherapist | Brain Health & Human Performance Consultant
Dr. Teralyn Sell has more than 20 years of experience in psychology, mental health, and human performance. Her work focuses on how stress, brain health, emotional regulation, and recovery influence decision-making and performance in demanding environments.
She is the author of Your Best Brain and works with individuals seeking to improve their capacity, resilience, and performance.