everything Flashcards
describe what skill acquisition is?
the study of our ability to acquire and develop movement skills
verdict on brain training effectiveness?
FAR transfer limited as athletic ability not closely related to task trained so no evidence on improving athletic performance
only improve on same task or similar task requiring working memory in the lab
what are several factors which experts are found to be superior in compared to non-experts?
anticipation (aids limiting factor of reaction time)
sport-specific pattern recall
sport specific knowledge
automaticity of movement
what are some of the background findings about experts vs non-experts?
age - those born 3 months after beginning of season disproportionately represented in teams due to confidence and biological superiority e.g speed
geography - better when from rural areas (more likely to engage in unstructured practice)
type of training - putting in many hours of deliberate practice (physicaly demanding wiht goal of getting better) and unstructured play (relaxed with peers)
describe Williams et al.,1999 model on how experts perceive performace scenes?
with tennis relevant examples?
visual information - detection e.g watch serve - identification e.g way ball is going - decision making & response selection e.g which way to move to return ball
what is temporal occlusion and give an example of how it can be used to test anticipation?
footage/photos paused at different time before/after action
e.g Williams & Burwitz, 1993
shooting at goal
goalies asked to predict where the ball will end up from the cues available
generally experts more accurate with less info (i.e 120ms before kick as opposed to after kick)
what did Eriksen believe made someone an expert?
working at a specific challenging point doing ‘deliberate practice’ for certain amount of time
then you will become an expert
limitation of temporal as opposed to event occlusion?
temporal only tells us about time of extraction
not nature of info i.e which specific cues aid anticipation
what is event occlusion and give an example of how it can be used to test anticipation?
image shows only certain cues with others missing in order to isolate cues and determine whether they are necessary for anticipation of action or not
e.g Abernethy & Russel, 1987
experts and novices indicate final destination of shuttlecock
5 different conditions e.g racquet only and lower body only
found racquet and arm important anticipatory cues for experts
e.g Muller et al., 2006 did same with cricket bowl
what are the implications of anticipation skills for the perceiver?
and for the deceiver?
perceiver: to reduce temporal and event uncertainty
coaching players to be aware of relevant cues
deceiver: learn how to disguise event and temporal cues o increase uncertainty
what did Causer & Williams, 2015 find out about clothing deception when taking penalties?
had penalty takers wear 3 different kits (normal, zigzag or circles) which make it easier/harder to detect hip position before taking kick
found that skilled ppts struggled most to anticipate where kick going when zigzag then circle - more affected by deception but consistently better response accuracy
no differences between kits for non skilled
what did Jackson et al, 2006 find about deception in football which slightly contradicts Causer & Williams findings?
used temporal occlusion with footballer doing stepover (deception) or doing nothing at all and had to guess direction they would go
found novices more affected by deception as stepover likely to happen in football (as opposed to deceiving kits)
what is meant by the behavioural arms race?
anticipation vs deception
should someone be more attuned to cues, the player they are against has to have a better disguise
also if more attuned to cues then will be better at deception and other player has to have improved discrimination
what are some problems with occlusion testing which limits the current data?
tesing in lab enviros and using videos rules out physical nature of sport - no way of knowing if would be able to act on knowledge of e.g where penalty going in real time and no idea whether they’d pick up those certain cues in situ
situational probabilities in game play not replicated in studies e.g information of game play past and present and situational factors of stress
small screen so not a realistic view
loss of audio
describe a decision making test currently used to test athletes/youth players?
and a study which uses it?
Belling et al., 2015 filmed football games and asked coaches what would be most-least likely to happen next when stopped at a certain time
Kelley, 2018, tested kids at Exeter city and found higher performers generally better at deciding best next move so might help discriminate between better or worse players
how watching decision making video is a good exercise for task cohesion?
showing a team a video of a recent game and asking what should happen next
good for team cohesion as testing whether players come up with same answers to show they read play the same and understand the decisions undertaken by their teammates
what % of penalties are missed?
roughly 25%
what % of cases can goalies save the penalty?
roughly 18.8%
what did Savelsbergh et al., 2002 find about goalies and penalties?
life size projection of player taking penalty, wearing eye trackers and holding joystick to indicate where they’d go
experts 36% saved and novices 25% saved
experts 42% height and novices 32%
experts 84% side and novices 71%
experts had slower reaction time but less correction
longer fixation period (focusing on 1 thing)
experts fixate more on legs and ball whereas noices more on upper region hence why they may be less accurate as fixating on wrong cues
BUT holding a joystick might not be reflecting on reality
what did Dicks, Button and Davids, 2010 find about fixation in different situations?
had a number of different conditions including in situ, in situ with reponse, verbal, joystick all to do with saving penalties
intercept condition longer looking at ball, moving look at feet, verbal look at feet
statistics on where focusing when taking a penalty?
70% focus on keeper (Kuhn, 1998)
visually guided aiming says generally we look at what we hit to be more accurate
what did Wood, 2010 find about penalty taking and gaze?
- 3 types
- most accurate
3 types of gaze:
1) keeper dependent - look at goalie and make decision based on what they do
2) keeper independent - look where aiming
3) giving the eyes (opposite independent) - look one side and hit the other
accuracy:
KD less accurate as hit it closer to goalie (worse takers overly focus on goalie in all their kicks but also most common type of kick which may be due to goalie being source of threat so fixate on them when anxious), better to look at target to be more accurate e.g if move late then throws you off as unexpected
best is keeper independent as if hit it accurately keeper can’t save it anyway
what did Jordet find about penalty accuracy and motivations?
if your penalty means you’ll lose if you miss, only 62% score
if your penalty means you’ll win, 92% will score
in 1 the bad guy (threat as doubting abilities) and in 1 the hero (challenge as trusting oneself in the hard situation)
describe the attentional control theory?
Eysenck et al., 2007
anxiety increases focus on threatening stimulus (internal & external) and makes us explicitly monitor our surroundings
due to disruption in balance between attentional systems and overriding by bottom-up
2 attentional systems: (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002)
bottom-up: stimulus-driven for directing attention to salient/novel stimuli in ventral system
top-down: goal directed for response selection in dorsal system
what did Wood and Wilson, 2010 find about having a moving goalkeeper when taking penalties?
in trials where goalie moved - looked at and fixated on goalie much more than when not moving
looked at goalie more than goal when moving in high threat more than low threat - movement messes up attentional control
more misses and less accurate with threat and distraction
what did Wood and Wilson, 2010 find in their study about quiet-eye training and penalty taking?
control group just practiced
quiet-eye group given targets to hit and shown their eye tracker footage to see where fixating (should focusing on target)
penalty shoot out with eye trackers in front of all ppts with moving goalie - quiet-eye group focusing more on where trying to shoot so maintaining attentional control in threat situation and were more accurate than before training and than the other team
what does ‘control’ mean according to Skinner, 1996?
and what are the 3 aspects?
perception of one’s capacities to be able to cope and attain goals under stress
- contingency - perception of outcome uncertainty “what effect do i have on outcome”
- competence - perception of ability “how good am i”
- control - ability to achieve goal (score) and cope with pressure “can i deal with this situation”
how does eye-tracking work?
by working out gaze direction
by comparing the relative position of the pupil and the relationship between it and the corneal eflection (glint)
made easier by red illumination of eye producing ‘bright pupil’ effect
what is meant by eye fixations?
gaze is maintained on location for sufficient time to allow information to be processed
within 3 degrees of visual angle for 100ms or longer
(at least 180ms to see object and initiate simple movement)
what is meant by saccades?
eyes move quickly from one location to the other, jump which bring new part of visual field into foveal vision
60-100ms (fastest eye movement)
can’t pick up informaion during saccade (saccadic suppression)
what does a large number of fixations in a certain area tell us?
user’s interest in object when viewing a scene
what is the definition of gaze?
what is gaze duration?
number of consecutive fixations in an area of interest
gaze duration is total of fixation durations in a particular area
what is the scan path?
line connecting conecutive fixations
reveals viewers visual exploration strategies and very different in experts and novices
what is attentional blindness?
missing something in your field of sight due to focusing on certain aspects in visual field
difference in gaze behaviour between ronaldo and a non-expert?
ronaldo looked at ball and player to work out what they’re going to do and chooses his actions accordingly
non-expert looked at ball the whole time
difference in gaze behaviours between younger and older people?
younger look ahead at target whereas older look only a couple of steps ahead Uiga et al., 2015
what did Mann et al., 2007 find about experts vs non-experts gaze behaviour?
found experts used fewer fixations of longer durations (therefore taking in much more info and less internal and external distraction info as fewer saccades as well) and longer QE period (final fixation before action)
how to calculate search rate?
related to experts?
number of fixations / mean duration of fixation
experts have lower search rate as fewer fixations for longer durations so less saccadic suppression
what is meant by top-down visuomotor instructions?
when are they used?
these instructions dominate gaze behaviour in the performance of visually guided actions
task specific/goal-directed eye movements to support the planning and control of actions
dorsal attention
define quiet eye?
onset and offset?
final fixation or tracking gaze directed to a single location in the visuomotor workspace within 3 degrees of a visual angle for a minimum of 100ms
onset - before final/critical movement in motor task
offset - when fixation deviates off target by more than 3 degrees of visual angle for more than 100ms
why is quiet eye important?
hands and rest of body are controlled by brain which gets valuable information about what to do from eyes
brief window of neural networks being organised
so measure of visuomotor control
describe the differences in gaze behaviours between golf and basketball?
golf - keep eye on where ball was during and after putting
basketball - look at traget before throwing but after doesn’t matter where you look as ball restricts vision of target
what is the difference between ASL and SMI trackers
ASL = 1 eye
SMI - both
what are bottom-up instructions?
ventral attention
stimulus driven so directs attention to salient/novel cues, allowing distractions to be noted
what did Lebeau t al., 2016 find about quiet eye differences in experts and novices?
large effect size between experts and novices performing quiet eye and large effect size between quiet eye and performance
suggests duration of quiet eye period related to performance and difference between experts and novices suggests it should be trained as a factor in differentiating performance
what is found about quiet eye periods when under anxiety?
quiet eye period during the aciton e.g putt decreases when anxiety increases, showing breakdown of attentional control
what is the difference in purpose of QET between novices and experts?
novices - help with acquisition of the skill (& performance under pressure)
experts - help with refinement of skill (& peformance under pressure)
difference in novice skill acquisition when using QET compared to tecnhique trained?
performance and quiet eye better when QET during retentions and under pressure and skilled learned faster
technically trained group drop under pressure
suported by study by Vine and Wilson, 2010
what did Vine and Wilson, 2010 find regarding QET vs control in performance, QE duration and cardiac deceleration and muscular activity when under retention or pressure?
mean error rate constant and lower when QET and quiet eye duration consistantly longer whereas control error rate higher and increased during pressure situation, as well as quiet eye period less and decreased under pressure
also constant decrease in cardiac output just before skill performed (maintaining focus and not stressed) but increased then decreased but not to same level in control
also muscle activity lower in QET group indicating more efficient movement and minimum amount of contraction necessary to perform movement (measured by EMG)
none of these factors told about, just happened due to applying QET
what was found about quiet eye training in the military?
better rifle aim after QET despite being poorer than control orginially
findings regarding gaze behaviour in surgeons and novices?
how training of young surgeons can therefore be improved?
surgeons only looked at target
novices often looked at the impliments they were using or switched gaze between them instead of fixating on a location (similar to findings in a sports setting)
gaze, motor and no training (discovery), found gaze trained had fastest completion time whereas movement group even worse than discovery group
and multitasking task gaze group the best again
what did Vine, Moore & Wilson find about gaze behaviour improvement suggestions vs gaze behaviour watching back?
those taught how to perform QE better in holing putts in both retention and pressure situation
those who didn’t receive training had complete breakdown under pressure
also performed on an actual golf course so naturalistic not in laboratory
what are the 3 skills trained for pressure performance?
1) prepare - readying and imaging
2) perform - focusing external attention (quiet eye) and executing with a quiet mind
3) review - evaluating and feedback for next attempt
consequences of being poor at e.g throwing and catch and not participating in exercise?
self-select not to take part in activities
leads to obesity in adulthood as inactivity continues into adulthood
difference in quiet eye with low/high motor coordination kids?
low coordination i.e poor catch success exhibited much less quiet eye duration than those with high/medium motor coordination
(despite never having been taught about gaze showing gaze important in coordination)
what was found about children being given quiet eye training for throw and catch ability?
i.e gaze behaviour emphasised when watching ‘how to’ video
also used kids with dyspraxia/developmental coordination disorder so showed they can learn better attentional control - just about teaching it in the right way
measured qualitative as if simply can’t catch then range of behaviours shoud be noted to distinguish between missed catches
improved catching ability and lower elbow angle (good) for QET group when quiet eye period longer and earlier
in another study some children improved by 35% (QET) and general motor coordination improved as reported by parents
what are the 3 stages of motor learning as described by Fitts & Posner, 1967?
cognitive
associative
autonomous
what occurs at the cognitive stage of motor learning (stage 1)?
concerned with generic aspects of skill e.g what needs to be done and what goes where
knowledge is explicit and based on rules
dramatic changes in performance and is highly variable due to retaining successful and rejecting unsuccessful strategies
make lots of errors and obvious mistakes
what occurs at the associative stage of motor learning (stage 2)?
refinement of skill
performace changes more subtle and less variable
nature of cognitive activity changes (more emphasis on error detection than skill learning)
less obvious errors
what occurs at the autonomous stage of motor learning (stage 3)?
in this stage after months/years of practice
automation of skill and performed with less intereference from other tasks
knowledge is implicit and non-verbalisable so struggle to explain what they are doing as they aren’t thinking about it
little to no variability between trials
what is meant by declarative knowledge?
requires awareness, attention and reflection
consciously recalled
constant repition can transfer declarative to procedural knowledge
encompasses explicit knowledge required in cognitive learning stage
what is meant by procedural knowledge?
occurs without attention, conscious or awareness
developed slowly through repitition of an act over many trials under varying circumstances
what is working memory?
which motor learning stage is it particularly useful for
allows us to store useful information long enough to make a decision/perform an action
composed of phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad and central executive
particularly useful for cognitive stage as need to store information temporarily to aid performance of action but may get overwhelmed due to only having a limited capacity
what are explicit processes?
rely on working memory for storage and manipulation
verbally based and open to introspection so conciously aware of info being processed
what are implicit processes?
unavailable for conscios inspection and difficult to verbalise
what is implicit motor learning?
accrual of motor skill without accumulation of, or at least conscious access to explicit knowledge e.g rules that underlie the performance of the skill
what is meant by reinvestment and when may it lead to choking?
turning one’s attention inward to the mechanics of one’s movement (explicit knowledge) so overthinking and not able to perform effortlessly
determined by 3 things:
1. performance context e.g seeing pressure as anxiety inducing or a challenge
- predisposition as measured by movement specific reinvestment scale: consciously processing motor movements and movement self-conscious questions
- degree to which underlying knowledge of the skill is accessible to consciousness as declarative knowledge - implicating that intial learning of movement should be implicit so no declarative knowledge to reinvest in
what are the findings regarding falling and reinvestment in older people?
reinvesting is positively correated with requiring more time to plan the movements and more foot placement errors
several factors to be able to tell if learning was implicit?
- fewer rules generated and can’t verbalise what they’re doing (lack of explicit verbal knowledge)
- smooth movement
- faster probe reaction times
- low coherence between motor planning and verbal analytical regions of the brain
- robustness to stress
- phenomenal sense of intuition (anecdotal)
describe the difference in coherence between T3/7 and Fz when implicit or explicit learning?
T3/7 where processing of explicit rules takes place (verbal-analytical)
Fz where execution of movement takes place (motor planning)
explicit - coherence (connection) between these regions as link between part thinking about and part performing rules
implicit - less coherence as don’t need access to part thinking about rules (T3/7)
name some mechanisms to create an implicit learning environment?
hence restricting build-up of declarative knowledge…
- loading working memory with a secondary task
- errorless learning
- analogy learning
others:
- no outcome feedback
- marginally perceptive outcome feeback
- quiet eye training?
- brain stimulation
what were the findings by Masters, 1992, regarding implicit learning and learning to putt?
used dual-task learning as a mechanism for implicit learning by asking ppts to generate random letters while learning how to putt, meaning they were unable to explicitly learn rules associated with putting due to a full working memory
shown to help them learn implicitly as had fewer explicit rules reported
implicit group learnt slower so performance progressed much slower but kept improving, even under pressure (more robust under psychological stress), whereas control and explicit group performance declined under pressure
cons with coaching implicit learning for coaches and learners?
leads to much slower learning so means coach has to spend more time teaching skill compared to normal
also, not everyone learning the skill will need to perform under stress so seems pointless learning implicitly to become more robust in situations they won’t be in
what is errorless learning?
findings suggesting how it may be implicit?
isn’t making no mistakes, but learning in a way to minimise mistakes
e.g when learning to putt, go further and further back when prove capable at a certain distance by making limited errors
implicit -
- less likely to analyse performance if performance was successful
Maxwell et al., 2001:
- performance less affected when performing a dual-task, suggesting not having to think about what they’re doing
- perform better under pressure, report fewer rules and better when attempting a novel distance
-Zhu et al, 2011 found increased coherence between T3-Fz when errorful over errorless learning
what was the finding regarding analogy learning in a clinical setting?
found that when Parkinson sufferers were told to walk like they were following footprints in the sand, they were able to walk in a faster and more stable manner
equally, with stroke patients, given analogies for walking e.g imagine you are kicking a football in front of you, found walking performance improved compared to before they were given analogies
who may benefit most from implicit and analogy learning?
implicit / errorless - those with low motor ability and explicit for those with high motor ability (Maxwell, Capio & Masters, 2016)
analogy - for novices, yet to master the action but not for experts who already have a specific way of performing the action
what may be another factor, other than reinvestment, leading to choking?
distractibility by external stimuli and focusing less on relevant stimuli
what are some advantages of reinvestment?
has advantages for picking up skill quicker when compared to implicit learning - implications for coaches and players who will never be involved in a pressure situation
‘somatic attention’
good for experts trying to get better by analysing their performance
good for experts trying to re-learn skills after injury
what is the five a model regarding experts re-learning skills?
Analysis Awareness Adjustment Automation (re-) Assurance
who first came up with theory of reinvestment?
Deikman, 1969 first proposed reinvestment theory as a way of unravelling automation of movement by reinvesting in actions and attention
describe the aim and findings of Vine et al., 2013 study on QET in golf putting?
- limitations?
- QET means to IML?
aim: investigate whether QET acts as a form of IML
findings:
QET group had decrease in error between retention and pressure whereas explicit showed increased and analogy showed no difference
limitations:
- analogy group given analogy which may have led them to focus attention internally as phrasing ‘arms swinging the pendulum of a clock’ instead of saying ‘club’
- inclusion of baseline may have focused attention inwards when high error rate so explicit rules considered
- no measure of external attention
- should have control group given no instructions to strengthen comparison
means to implicit?
PROS - less conscious awareness and explicit rules and reduced reinvestment and choking
CON- could be due to promoting external focus of attention focused on gaze instead of irrelevant stimuli
example of internal vs external focus when windsurfind?
internal - paying attention to how feet moving
external - paying attention to how board moving
found fell in less when paying attention to external cues
description of attention?
to do with concentration and focus
what we are thinking about/aware of
consciousness, awareness and cognitive effort (takes lots of cognitive resources)
attentional capacity limited
what is selective attention?
what does it depend on?
focussing on relevant environmental cues
ignore irrelevant cues
ability at doing this depends on:
experience
quality of instruction
arousal - anxiety
where should learners focus attention when learning a new skill?
direct learners to focus on the movement (external focus)
5 examples of attention not being directed appropriately?
what are the implications of this?
- reinvestment
- explicit monitoring - thinking about what doing instead of subconsciously
- ironic processing - try not to think about something but ends up being what you’re thinking about, leading to becoming more anxious
- hyperdistractibility - anxiety leads to losing focus as distractible
- constrained action hypothesis
important when considering instructions and feedback in skill acquisition environments
definitions or internal and external focus?
internal - focus on body movements
external - effect of movements on environment
is where you’re looking always what you’re paying attention to?
i.e does attentional focus = visual focus?
no, attentional focus may be thinking about feet on board but visual focus may be looking in front of him
what did Wulf, Hoß & Prinz, 1998 find in their internal/external attention study involving skiing?
supporting findings?
- effectiveness of movement
internal focus - exert force with outer foot
external focus - exert force on outer wheels (1 word difference between instructions optimal)
control group - no instructions
aim to get ski simulator from one side to the other whilst remaining balanced
found external focus lead to greater amplitude travelled (cm) in practice and at retention (without instructions) than control group and internal focus were the worst
suggesting external focus better than internal
supported by second experiment by these people finding that external group better at retention in stabilometer task - but markers in front of feet may have brough awareness to feet (why not so much improvement)
what did McNevin, Shea & Wulf (2003) in an updated version of the stabilometer for balance task measuring internal and external focus?
- effectiveness of movement
had 3 different marker positions and internal focus group
found better balance performance when markers aware from feet than when internal or near feet
further away from body you think about, the more effective it is so suggesting external focus better
what did Wulf & Su, 2007 find about internal/external focus instructions given in golf for skill accuracy?
ppts as novices
- effectiveness of movement
ppts were novices
internal, external and control group
shot from 15m away, found external group more accurate than control and internal
few confounding variables as changing 1 word in instructions i.e focus on swing of arms/club
what did Wulf & Su, 2007 find about internal/external focus instructions given in golf for skill accuracy?
ppts as experts
- effectiveness of movement
pitch shot to smaller target and given points based on accuracy
external focus group still better accuracy than controlled and internal
important as improving performance for athletes at the top of their game (control group were level they wer previously at)
issue with internal/external focus research regarding significance of results?
subject to publication bias as only publishing if significant result comparing internal to external, so may be quite a few studies not showing significant difference between the 2
combat this by sending study criteria, getting accepted, then publishing regardless of results
describe Wulf et al., 2001 constrained action hypothesis?
criticisms and limitations?
internal focus/attempting to consciously control one’s movements constrains motor systems by disruption of automatic control processes
external focus/focusing on movement effect promotes use of automatic control processes
limitation that novices don’t have these processes so why does it happen for them?
nothing in theory about how/why it works? - descriptive theory
probe reaction time evidence supporting constrained action hypothesis regarding internal and external focus of attention?
- automaticity of movement
shorter reaction time, better performance (fewer errors) and faster movement adjustment with external focus
implies reduced attentional demands and use of reflexive (automatic) control mechanisms
jump and reach task supporting constrained action hypothesis regarding internal and external focus of attention?
explanation for this from another study?
- efficiency of movement
Wulf, Zachry, Granados & Dufek
able to jump higher (increased power) and kinematics showed made movements more efficient when told to focus externally (on rung rather than finger)
found lower muscle activity with external focus (by using EMGs) which implies greater movement efficiency (Wulf, Dufek, Lozano & Pettigrew (2010))
what are the 5 categories that external focus advantages have been found for?
movement effectiveness e.g in football kicking accuracy movement efficiency e.g in running levels of expertise age groups disabilities
what did Wulf et al., 2010 find regarding internal/external focus study with children?
limitations with this?
external focus study told children to produce a ‘C’ when throwing football (limitation as may be implicit/analogy learning so may have been testing this instead and also instructions very different not just 1 word so may have been harder to understand etc. so confounding variables more likely)
found better when external
what did Chiviacowsky et al., 2012 find regarding internal/external focus with children with intellectual disabilities?
- effectiveness of movement
better throwing accuracy when external focus
important implications as good way of teaching movements
what have clinical studies found about internal and external focus?
Wulf et al., 2009, found external group with parkisons had less amount of sway (balance issues)
Fasoll et al., 2002, found stroke patients external group performed faster movement and more efficient when removing can from shelf and placing it on table
what was found about movement form in golf when focusing either internally or externally?
Wulf &a Kim, 2013
external focus led to X factor increase (stretch - good thing) and carry distance further
so focus changing mechanics of movement performed
what was found about movement efficiency and internal/external focus of attention?
limitation of this?
Zachry et al., 2005
internal (wrist) and external (basket - not result of movement so moving away from external focus towards something else e.g QET)
greater accuracy in external group and more efficiency in movemet (less muscular activity shown by EMG)
findings of Lohse et al., 2010 regarding movement efficiency in darts with internal/external focus?
external more efficient movement (less EMG activity), more accurate and faster movement
findings by Lohse et al., 2011 regarding internal/external focus?
what questions does it bring up?
better performance by external
ppts said aware of better performance when external focus
brings up question of whether external focus is the preferred and go to focus and therefore when making people focus internally are we making them going against what they automatically do - external not better just internal worse
what is the self-invoking trigger hypothesis?
mere mention of performer’s body provokes implicit, probably unconscious, access to the self
this self-focus may lead to self-evaluation and activate self-regulatory processes - and result in ‘micro-choking’ episodes
study by Ring et al, 2013 suporting self-invoking trigger hypothesis?
internal - vibration on hand
external - light on digital display
(may have caused gaze behaviour to change so confounding)
successful manipulation as attentional focus on ball less in internal and attention on grip much higher (self-report data)
external were better - associated with more accurate performance and reduced conscious processing
effects of external vs internal focus?
external: more effective movements (balance and accuracy), greater automaticity (probe RT) and more economical movement patterns (less muscle activity and force production)
benefits persist under pressure and across difference skills, groups, ages etc.
what is Wulf’s optimal theory of motor learning?
combination of attentional and intrinsic motivational factors which are important in performance outcomes
effects rooted in dopamine responses to anticipation of positive experiences
learner autonomy acts through an enhanced expectancy pathway
what is the difference between retention and transfer tests?
retention - skill performed in same condition as training either:
- immediately (directly after training)
- delayed (break from training, typically 1-7 days)
transfer - skill performed in similar but different condition than training
no specific time period
how does Schmidt, 1991, define ‘practice’?
any activity, overt or covert, through which a person seeks to establish or refine intended performance
what are the differences between blocked, serial and random practice?
which has been shown to provide more effective learning of a specific motor skill
blocked:
sequence in which single task or skill rehearsed repeatedly before moving onto next task
repetitive movement with aim of creating consistent, effective technique
AAABBBCCC
serial:
skills/tasks practiced in serial order
ABCABCABC
random:
practice sequence where tasks/skills performed in a random order
more difficult to see improvement
found more efficient way to learn specific motor skill (Shea&Morgan) as more actively engaged in motor movements but forget short term solutions to movement so creating solutions (similar to when in competition)
no pattern to it whatsoever
what is meant by specificity of learning?
and who proposed this theory?
how was this demonstrated and by who?
what does it suggest about the type of practice we shoud engage in?
Henry, 1960
in order for learning and good performance to occur, the practice environment should be as close as possible to the performance environment
so practice shouldn’t be variable and instead sould be very specific to the conditions and ovement we want to replicate
Proteau et al., 1992 - visual aiming task
- conducted aiming task with no visual feedback (could only see hand/no hand)
- found adding information reduced performace (those who couldn’t see hand before and then being able to see hand)
- suggesting what we learn and skills we develop is specific to training condition
what is the schema theory and who proposed it?
which theory does this go against?
what does it sugggest about the type of practice we should engage in?
schmidt, 1977
against specificity of learning theory:
actions aren’t stored as a whole, instead…
we gather info from movement:
- initial conditions
- motor action charcateristics e.g how fast
- results of action
- sensory aspects
relationships between this info used to create recognition (recognise movement)/recall schema
so variable practice may be more beneficial as creating more info to be used to create schema
what is contextual interference when thinking about variability of practice?
when is it high vs medium vs low?
performer either alternates between different skills OR same skill in different conditions (variability controlled)
coach then corrects movement errors
very controlled manner:
high - random order of trials of all task variations
medium - random repetition of short blocks of trials of each task variation
low - non-repeated blocks of trials of each task variation
what is the elaboration hypothesis?
implications?
random practice causes people to elaborate or discover the distinctiveness among skills (blocked practice does not) - fits really well with contextual interference theory
beneficial for performance in a retention test
what is the traditional learning theory and what are challenges towards it?
that learning occurs linearly
and in this wayusually trained by minimising variability and correcting ‘movement errors’
however, low probability that athlete will encounter same movement condition twice due to changes in environment so suggests movement not just governed by ‘central control’ aspect but enviro as well
motor learning may be aided by self-organisation
what is differential learning and who proposed it?
what does this theory challenge?
how does it differ from contextual intereference?
schollhorn et al., 2006
ecological approach to skill acquisition
maximises/forces variability by preventing repetition (never completes same movement twice)
so experiencing as many movements as possible
uses stochastic resonance
variation requires attention and adaptability
challenges view that there is one target movement pattern that should be achieved (traditional learning theory)
difference with contextual intereference theory in way it is enforced, variabiilty is forced and no movement completed twice so concept of correcting a movement not valid
what did Moradi et al. 2014 find regarding specificity of learning?
which study does this agree with?
trained in similar conditions to performance condition
either could see target (basket) or everything
only performed well when had same level of visual ability (full or obstructed) in both retention and delayed
so skill performed best when conditions match
same as effect of Proteau study but more sport specific
key issues with research comparing variable to non-variable practice?
(regarding the individual’s aims for skill learning)
define variable as pratice involving lots of skills and conditions
define non-variable as block praticing and repeating certain skills/conditions
issues:
research shows variability of pratice improves transfer test results for skills
BUT what do we want, to be able to transfer skill (e.g shooting from rugby to football environment) or master movement we want to learn?
depends on motives
ALSO how can coaches isolate an optimal movement pattern to judge which group performed better in studies e.g Michael Johnson leaning back but his optimal movement style
what did Shea and Cole, 1990 find about specific vs variable practice?
what is the explanation of this for both specific and variable training and what are the implications for practice?
move arm to match target amount of force constant practice (specific), constant pratice with other forces in breaks (specific and variable) and specific + specific group which was constant practice with same force in breaks
but issues that specific and variable group had additional practice (made specific + specific group to counter this)
all groups same at second retention but specific + variable group did best at first retention (where the benefits lie as alternating means can’t gradualy develop skill and have to constantly adjust so at first retention can perform better, quicker)
SHORT LIVED BENEFICIAL EFFECT
suggesting constant practice more efficient (specific with least trials did better than with more trials and the same as specific + variable so more beneficial)
what did Landin et al. 1993 find about specific and variable training in real sporting environment?
specific from certain range
variable from different ranges
(when shooting hoops in basketball)
first trial specific and variable better then afterwards was the same (implicates specific more beneficial)
is variability of practice a means to implicit motor learning?
Wulf & Schmidt
found that learning better with variable practice than constant and learning was implicit - preventing construction of specific rules
support for contextual intereference theory?
Shea & Morgan
found transfer and retention both greater in high contextual intereference group
effects most notable/beneificial for more complex tasks
what did Goode & Magill, 1986 find regarding
blocked (one type of serve a day), serial (order of serve types) or random (no more than 2 serve types repeated consecutively) more effective for badminton serve?
random better than blocked practice at retention and transfer
contextual intereference effects in already skilled athletes?
issue with this?
Hal, Domingues and Cavazos, 1994
random and blocked groups for batting pitch in baseball and control (no extra sessions)
found that improvement greater in retention for random group even in experienced sportsmen
issue: reliant on coach feedback - have subjective opinion about optimal movement pattern they view
what did Schollman, 1994 find about optimal movement pattern in elite discus throwers and in javelin throwers?
same throw not produced twice depending on context e.g competition and weather
also found large vairation in throwing techniques in javelin
suggesting no optimum way of performing movement
so how can we coach someone to produce optimum movement pattern?
what did Schollhorn, Hegen and Davids find about differential learning theory in a study?
limitations?
performed whole movement but in permanently changing natural conditions
12 experienced football players
very explicit instructions (traditional learning), blocked group (differential learning blocked) and differential learning random
both differential groups improved more and no difference between them (it works)
but very small sample size so benefits limited and not significant results
instability promoting self-organisation of solutions - so should be better at adapting during competition (more skilled and efficient)
study regarding differential approach, compared to the traditional approach to learning in speed skating?
whether changing body position at start of race improves speed
differential group - every skate started with different posture (no feedback)
traditional group - taught ‘ideal’ posture (feedback regarding that posture)
control - regular training
at 25m no differences
at 49m differential group had significantly faster time at post-test than both other groups (learnt to accelerate effeciciently from loads of different positions so more optimum movement efficiency)
continue to improve even after training
small sample (27 people)
how does the differential learning effect work according to Schollhorn, 2009?
bell shaped continuum of development of learning
differential effect works differently in children and adults (children have to be reined in slightly when it comes to variance)
performance peaks when using differential learning at top of bell
what was found by Santos et al about creativity in football related to a variable environment?
slight limitation?
theorised that being part of exploratory environment and therefore at an increased subjectivity to movement variability, then creativity would increase
2 groups: differential learning group (focused on passing ability in variable conditions with no error correction) and control group
DL group more successful in pass completion, behaviour of team improved relevant to game play - qualitative approach so relying on coach feedback
what did Hossner et al., 2016, find when comparing between contextual interference and differential learning?
how do they describe the theories?
how did they study the differences between them (2 studies) and conclusions?
decided that these 2 approaches were basically 2 different names for the same phenomenon: variability of movement
CI: elaboration of representation of motor programme (similar as any variability introduced in this way would create DL learning environ etc.)
DL: exploration of movement space
separated by structure of variability in practice conditions
study 1: difference between DL having no error feedback but CI using error feedback
traditional, DL and DL + feedback
measuring distance from centre of traget
no significant results between groups (can’t say DL statistically better so not in concordance with Schollhorn’s results)
study 2: difference between CI and DL with adding more or less variability in practice structured group (variability in order), traditional group and DL group structured learning group improved most in shotput throw but not significantly no benefits of DL over traditional, better suppoprt for contexual intereference theory (structured group better)
what was Schollhorn’s response to Hossner et al., 2016 studies regarding difference between contexual interference and differential learning?
invited to write response as went against support for differential learning theory (his own theory so not subjective in his critique)
didn’t recognise theoretical differences between DL and CI so basis of study wrong
- DL built on principle that no feedback given and no correct way to perform movement - (so how was there a DL group with feedback - study 1)
- there are major differences between the 2 theories - which aren’t recognised (only similarity is that both encourage variability of practice)
- typically, blocked learning over random under contexual interference produces better performance at retention - but not the case in either of the studies
- unable to reproduce previous findings - in study 1 due to age (children) as see more variability in movements of children compared to adults (bell curve) so more in traditional blocked design than adults, reducing ability for results to be significant
- should train on alternate days for shotput group as opposed to consecutive group
briefly what is contexual interefernce?
how linked to DL?
learning manipulated in controlled way
elaboration of representation of motor programme
also, manipulations that increase CI also increase variability, leading to increased exploration which increases DL
briefly what is differential learning?
forces athlete to experience high levels of variability in practice
optimum level of noise (variability as too much stunts improvement)
exploration of movement space
Hossner suggests you can separate DL and CI by looking at structure of variability in practice but Schollhorn disagrees
what is the constraints led approach to skill learning?
what does practice involve?
take a particuar skill/tactic and isolates it in a game
not given instructions
put in constraints to limit amount of movement options in order for players to come up with their own movement solutions
ecological approach
centred around exploration and autonomy of players
controlled practice design manipulated in very specific ways to bring about desired outcome
linking whats going on in brain with whats going on in environment - discovery based not just controlled by mechanisms in brain, but nevertheless still needs to be thought about - self-organisation
which 2 questions was the constraints led approach developed to answer?
- how can we account for organisation/behaviour wihtou attributing it to an internal structure - what guides our ability to self-organise
- how can we produce behaviours which are stable AND adaptive - consistent and responding to cues in enviro
what are the main things that the constraints led approach was designed to do?
1) alter player beh.
2) introduce fun & competitive games
3) help players find own solutions (need to give enough time and consider age of players)
4) tackle specific skills/aspects of games (with appropriate constraints so skill still looks like how it’s supposed to)
what are constraints and according to who?
regarding the constraints led approach
Newell, 1986
- facilitating a particular type of behaviour through manipulation of the environment
- actions emerge through self-organisation not central processor and limited by environmental constraints
- constraints aren’t barriers, they just define how you play by limiting certain movements to enable solutions to be created (good decision making)
- constraints don’t necessarily increase complexity e.g reducing number of people in a team
- some are time dependent
describe the constraints triangle?
proposed by who?
Newell, 1986
3 types:
- organism constraints - within you e.g maximum speed (some can be changed and only constraint in certain situations)
- environmental constraints - conditions in which task performed de.g weather (can’t be manipulated by coach)
- task constraints
1. goals of task
2. rules of task
3. equiptment
(don’t control movements just limit them)
example of the role of interpretation in constraint effects?
e.g swimmers imposed constraints for breaststroke by keeping arms under water thus limiting themselves
what is the evolution of the constraints triangle?
circular causality?
to understand process of constraints have to understand which info available from enviro and what parts of these influence our behaviours
circular causality - perception doesn’t cause movement and neither does movement cause perception
interaction between them but not causal relationship
what is dynamics of action within the constraints led approach?
the way we can perform movement is dependent on perception-action cycle (link between them in constraints triangle evolution)
have to understand perceptual info and…
affordance - understanding own capabilities to perform a skill
what is behavioural dynamics approach as an aspect of dynamics of action?
and who proposed it?
Warren, 2006
performer and enviro linked together in coupled dynamic system
and how they impact each other in past, present and future to create self-organisation of movement
what is the ecological dynamics approach as an aspect of dynamics of action?
- building on behavioural dynamics approach
performer, environment AND affordance (perceived capabilites)
aspects:
takes into account…
amount of training received in focusing attention, directing intention, interaction of enviro and performer, biological degeneracy and high level cognition (effect but not control movement)
example of taking constraint led approach to improving football passing?
instead of having 2 players opposite each other
be inside a square with defenders and have to decide where to pass and where to move - improves passing, decision making, movement etc. not just passing skill but still improving passing in game type situation
issues with research into the constrait led approach?
- methods evaluating CLA different to typical learning measures as can’t compare to normal curve due to encouraging individuals to come up with their own methods - largely qualitative data
- very recent so limited amount of research available
- unsure which constraints to use as have to be trained in very specific way and manipulate properly - need to understand which constraints have which effects on the performer
what did the review by Buszard et al., about scaling equipment find?
- regarding the constraints led approach
- several limitations with studies included in this review
scaling equipment is a constraint in itself e.g if basketball hoop too high for age
scaling equipment = making appropriate size etc. to cater for child’s heights and ages
found in general good evidence about effectiveness of scaling equipment e.g in tennis better accuracy and shots when ball altered
also ore willing to engage in sport and continue it if equpment scaled so keep kids in sport long enough for them to improve and become really good
limitations:
however, longest study included 8 weeks - not very long for learning effects
not compared to those using non-scaled equipment
do benefits continue when equipment full size or does it limit them when transitioning into this
use qualitative data from coaches and out of context of game
link between constraint led approach and implicit learning?
link or not?
may be a means to implicit learning as:
- encourages autonomy and to find our own solutions without being told rules
- similar to errorless learning as constraining options to enable more successful movements (limiting errors)
- found when using scaled equipment (constraint), dual task not a problem, so reduces load and attentional demands
however:
- wouldn’t give someone a dual task in CLA context
- IL theories cite central governor in brain for performance
what was found about scaling equipment in adults, Scott & Gray?
- regarding constraint led approach?
whether changing weight of bat (to be heavier) in skilled basketball players changed task constraint
adapted in different way and speed based on affordance and individual constraints e.g
physically stronger adapted movements by swinging with more force
whereas
physically weaker adapted movement by changing timing
led to longer term change in swing movements
most popular constraint applied to training?
support for this?
small sided games (fewer players, limited area etc.)
supported as being a constraint by:
- specific drills only useful for creating movement patterns in highly constrained environment (dribbling round cones not necessarily players), whereas small sided games provides skills important in real game-play
- stabalises parameters of e.g distance between attackers and defenders or player preferrences so developing dynamic team approach and cohesive unit and team organisation
- become better attuned to using perceptual information to guide movements
- makes training more fun
study looking at small sided games in hockey? (Timmerman et al., 2017)
- regarding the constraint led approach
manipulated size of pitch and number of players
used notational analysis - watch video and record certain actions e.g number of shots on goal (quantitative but lends itsef to subjectivity so important for same person to do it all)
found lower density of players (reduced number) led to significant increase in successful passes and increased number of challenging situations players had to face
number of players made more difference than density (how much space they had)
good at regulating interactions between team mates
suggested should change numbers and people involved to enrich skills
what was found about scaling equipment constraints in mini tennis by Fitzpatrick et al., 2015?
scaling changed at each level depending on ability e.g compresion of ball, net height, how game scored
48 ppts
used notational analysis
found players adapted to situations really well and had more robust skills
what was found about divers aborting dives (due to poor approach to dives) by Barris et al?
regarding constraint led approach?
dysfunctional when in competition as either given penalty or score of 0 if abort dive (baulk)
baulking means not able to explore variability of movements which are associated with that approach to the dive
4 divers engaged in programme encouraged to never baulk unless dangerous
found ppts completed more dives and baulked less than previously
and greater consistency in diving scores
and greater variability in movements (due to exploring movement patterns more) showing increasing variability as a good thing (differs to many other approaches)
what was found about ‘herding’ and reducing it by changing rules?
- regarding constraint led approach
herding condition (had to follow paired opponent & 2 scoring zones) non-herding condition (weren't paired & 4 scoring zones)
higher clustering behaviour in herding condition and more herding behaviour
so changing rules can increase/decrease herding
but didn’t look at whether long term and when rules eliminated if herding stays decreased
what did Gray, 2018 find about baseball batters when they hit a ball?
3 groups:
internal focus group - technique and movements of limbs
external focus - focus external to body
constraint group - barrier put across field which they had to hit ball over (constraint - ball had to be hit with launch angle over 20 degrees and moved depending on success)
goal to help batters learn own way of performing better batting angle as used group with low (sub-optimal) launch angle
used VAR as incorrect feedback about launch angle if in batting cage
found CLA group had greater accuracy and angle, higher speed of ball (not trained but still developed) - low variability at start - high during (exploring movement options during training - low at end
external group next best and internal worst
what is a definition for perception?
the processing of sensory input (NOTE not detection or management)
what is a definition of learning?
a relatively permanent change in behaviour (not covert characteristics) brought about by practice or experience
according to Vickers, the quiet eye in golf putting is maintained until after the ball is struck, what is this called?
dwell
what are the 2 factors on the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale and who created this?
Masters et al., 2005
conscious motor processing
and
movement self-consciousness
what is Ericcson’s formula for deliberate practice as a means to expertise and how did he discover this?
deliberate practice = purposeful practice methods (specific goal, intense focus, immediate feedback and frequent discomfort by operating on edge of abilities) leading to creating effective mental representations for information + expert coaching (+early specialisation is key)
‘the right sort of practice carried out over a sufficient period of time will lead to improvement, nothing else will’ - so disputes the 10 000 hours if practice not effective
found this out by giving student a number of random numbers to learn and increased by 1 when got it right but decreased by 2 when wrong. Got stuck at 7 numbers for ages (upper bound of his ability) but breakthrough when developed effective mental representations to remember the numbers - suggesting no limit on performance
what are the 3 pathways of skill acqusition?
- early specialisation - deliberate practice (Ericsson et al.) e.g gymnastics in order to get our 10 000 hours in
- early engagement - single sport deliberate pratice and play (Ford et al.) - but arguably don’t pick our sport under 10 and instead find which one we like later on
- late specialisation/early diversification - deliberate play (Cote et al.)
what did Galton, 1869, suggest about limits on modifiability of performance?
‘definite limit to the muscular powers of every man, which he cannot by any education or exertion overpass’ - traditional view that make gains, then plateau - power law
so disagrees with Ericsson suggesting no limit on performance when deliberate practice
finding regarding child prodigies and practice?
going against point of Galton?
- improve with practice
- improvement goes beyond point of physical maturity using training (becoming fitter & stronger as you get older)
- true across diverse skill domain e.g sport and working memory
what are the key points of Ericsson’s theory regarding deliberate practice?
- expertise accomplished via motivation, concentraion and willingness to work (through deliberate practice)
- innate talent unimportant when compared to their attained abilities and skills
- no objective evidence for high intial level of performance without any relevant experience or practice nor abrupt improvement of reproducible performance when regularly tested
what is deliberate practice?
activities invented with primary purpose of attaining and improving skills
- individualised designed by coach to improve specific aspects of performance through repetition
- have to monitor training with full concentration (effortful so limits duration of daily training)
NOT activities for which learning may be an indirect result
how does Ericsson account for individual performance differences?
problem with this?
amount and type of practice
10 000 hours of deliberate practice
however, monotonic assumption suggesting 1st hour makes as much difference as 9999th hour
what are 5 elements of deliberate practice?
- activity specifically designed to improve performance, with help of coach
- activity can be repeated a lot - and over space of 10 years
- feedback on results continuously available
- mentally highly demanding
- not much fun ‘practice always effortful but not inherently enjoyable’
what does Ericsson suggest about modifying difficulty of task?
have to continually modify levels of task difficulty so that it matches current performance levels
- prevent plateaus (arrested development)
- perpetuate adaptation to higher levels of training stress leading to higher levels of performance
describe the 3 stage response to stress?
what is this known as?
general adaptations syndrome - Selye
- shock - must adapt to training stress
- adaptation - re-attain homeostasis
- staleness - positive adaptations are no longer made
periodisation important - balance of training and recovery
describe the study first demonstrating the 10 000 hour rule by Ericsson et al, 1993?
issue with generalisability of this finding?
looked at differences between professional, best, good and least accomplished expert violinists and amaterus
10-18 years old key period in determining whether very good or not by continually increasing hours instead of doing same number over the years
found only 10 000 hour mark hit by best experts and professionals and longest hours a week e.g at 20 doing 30 hours as opposed to 25 by best students
10 000 hours may be specific to violin players?
study comparing different sports and instruments practice hours?
rough trend with figure skating and violin highest and soccer and hockey lowest
what is the suggestion about reaching the 10 000 hours of practice in order to become an expert?
what is the maths behind it?
20h per week for 13y/o tennis players
24-30h per week for swimmers by 11y/o
maths:
20h a week (made up of physical and technical training) for 50 weeks for 10 years = 10 000 hours
how to apply theory of deliberate practice to training?
not constrained by what we’re born with and instead by how much work we put in
intrinsic motivation key (may not occur when parents choose sport for you as motivated to please parents instead) which perhaps comes about from autonomy of choice
have to find appropriate challenge point
what is the problem with research on deliberate pratice?
nearly impossible to get longitudinal study as can’t separate groups for 10 years and get half to do deliberate practice and other half not
instead have to rely on projective measures by asking elite and non-elite athletes how many hours they practiced a year etc. but obvious problem that not able to accuretly recall the amount of hours they were doing at each age
also, unsure as to whether deliberate practice is key variable distinguishing experts vs non-experts
also, suggested that actually 5000 hours of sport specific skills (deliberate practice) and 5000 of other skills such as fitness (not deliberate practice)
what are the 3 constraints for completing 10 000 hours of practice?
- motivation - to improve performance (not enjoyment)
- resources - finances, parents time etc.
- effort - attention in training and balance between effortful training and rest (periodisation)
what did Baker, Cote and Abernathy, 2003 find regarding difference in type and amount of practice engaged in by experts and non-experts?
experts spend more time engaging in activities that are specifically related to sports performance
suggests deliberate practice explictly linked to skill development
what did a meta-analysis in 2014 find about deliberate pratice in different domains?
and in 2017 specific to sport?
2014 - deliberate practice important but not as important as previously thought
2017 - deliberate practice accounting for 18% of sporting performance at all levels BUT only 1% of variance in performance in elite athletes accounted for by deliberate practice - really that important?
genetic component of jamaican sprinters?
and cultural element?
ancestors in slave trade
transport really awful conditions so to survive had to be genetically really strong and healthy - these are the ancestors of the current population of jamaica so have very good genetics leading to very good sprinting performance
cultural element - lots of support for sprinters but less so for other sports (same in other countries e.g Kenya and long-distance athletes)
what does Rich Tucker argue regarding deliberate practice and genetics?
suggests deliberate practice helps but also have to have good genes to reach top level
describe Tucker & Collins, 2012 thought model on practice vs innate abilities?
world record holder - used up most of potential through training
but another athlete, not maximising training despite innate ability being greater than current world record holder so potential to be better
how many hours of practice has been shown to produce chess experts?
3000 hours
23 600 hours
some practiced for 25 000 and not experts so seems hours not as important
finding about exceptions to 10 000 hours rule?
28% of elite athletes in one study had participated for less than 4 years in their sports
were quick learners who had played 3 or more sports before settling on the main one
what are the issues in applying deliberate practice to training?
- all forms of training might consititute deliberate practice
- what is actual content of deliberate practice
- do we need 10 years of practice as may lead to burnout from early specialisation
- able to make it fun otherwise may make excuses to get out of sport
- should consider transferable skills from other sports?
- level of coaching received depending on level of performance you are at
- lack of social life so social isolation
what is involved in the developmental model of sports participation?
who proposed it and when?
- Cote et al, 2007
- highlights importance of developmentally appropriate physical training patterns and psycho-social influences
- identifies 2 pathways towards expertise in sport: early specialisation & early diversification
- 3 stage trajectory towards elite and recreational performance:
1. sampling years (6-12) - lots of deliberate play
2. specialising years (13-15) - still playing several sports but balanced level of deliberate practice and play
3. investment years (16+) - choose 1 sport and high proportion of deliberate practice
what are the differences between early specialisation and diversification?
early specialisation:
- focus ondeliberate practice
- early intro to specialised skills
- high concentration
- less emphasis on enjoyment
- high adult involvement
- singe sport
- player drop out
- more at risk of injuries as stressing certain parts of body (reduced physical health) and burn-out
diversification:
- high amount of deliberate play
- modified rules positive skill development
- increased player involvement
- enjoyable experiences
- little adult involvement
- sample a variety of sports
- increased player retention (not dropping out)
- able to find sport thats more enjoyable and most talented in
what are the 7 postulates from Cote about youth sport?
does early diversification help or hinder participation
diversification linked to longer sporting career
if diversification gives more positive developmental experience
high amounts of deliberate play increases intrinsic motivation
deliberate play establishes range of motor and cognitive skills
should children have opportunity to specialise at 12
have late adolescents developed range of skills needed to invest effort into highly specialised training in one sport
deliberate practice vs developmental model of sports participation assumptions in elite athletes if correct?
deliberate:
elite athletes: specialise in main sports earlier and start DP earlier and accumulate more dp hours
DMSP:
sample various sports, greatre amounts of deliberate play during childhood
more deliberate practice than play in teenage and adult years
what is meant by ‘sampling’?
trying lots of different sports as opposed to specialising in 1
provides good foundation of cognitive, motor and perceptual skills to use later in specialised sport (Baker, Cote & Abernathy, 2003) - especially good decision making (Berry et al, 2008)
can you be an elite athletes if you sample different sports in childhood?
NO in early-maturation sports e.g gymnastics and figure-skating
YES in most other sports as peak performance occurs after athlete fully matured so diversification doesn’t make difference in that respect
improves decision making so especially good in sports requiring these skills
what was found about experts vs non-experts in team sports and their childhood training patterns (Baker, Cote & Abernathy, 2003)?
experts had more practice after 12 y/o than non-experts
and
had more additonal activities but dropped off number after age of 12
even at age 5 do 3 and 1/2 vs 2 and 1/2 activities per week
what did Gibbons et al, 2002 find about when Olympians chose to specialise in their sport and number of sports played?
very few in primary school
few in high school
but mostly in either college or later (beyond age of 18)
10-14 3/4 different sports being played and only reduced between 19-22
winter sports even tended to have more than one at 19-22
will you play sports longer if you sample? (as opposed to early specialisation)
engaging in variety of sports promotes long-term sport participation
Law et al, 2007 found Olympic gymnasts rated health and enjoyment as lower than international
do you get more positive youth development through sampling?
more sports = more socialising and friends
Wright & Cote, 2003 found uni students related to more positive peer relationships and leadership skills when had diversified sporting experiences
important contributor to physical, cognitive, social and emotional development
positives and negatives experiences involved in sport?
pos: challenge, relationships, community
neg: poor coach relationships and player relationships
what did Fraser-Thomas, 2008 find about characteristics of drop-outs?
engaged in fewer extra-curricular activities
reached develpomental milestones earlier
more likely to have athlete parents
youngest in training group
less likely to have best friend within that sport
name some elements which may be transferable across sports (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000)?
movement (biomechanical actions), perceptual skills (info), conceptual skills (strategic and rules regarding performance) and physical conditioning (physiological adaptations across similar modes of training)
what is meant by deliberate play?
how is it similar to sampling?
in some ways like sampling : doing what you want to do in different sports
activities which are: intrinsically motivated (due to being self-directed and designed by kids), immediate gratification and designed to maximise enjoyment e.g street football
adapted rules to maximise enjoyment and suit the game
development of motor and cognitive skills through experimental learning
what did the USOC report find about factors influencing sport decision in Olympians and average number of sports played?
most important was intrinsic love of activity, followed by sport
early success
parental influence
coach and peer recruitment
decreased as got older:
U10 - over 3
15-18 - 2
19-22 - less than 2
is deliberate play good for learning?
explore physical capabilities in various contexts and at minimal cost
- generate new skills
- adapt to novel and uncertain situations
Berry et al, 2008 - found exceptional decision-makers had engaged in more deliberate play in invasion style games as kids
Soberlak and Cote, 2003 - found over 1/3 of time spent playing ice-hockey was deliberate play, more than deliberate practice
what are characteristics of informal games?
Coakley & Pike, 2009
children interested in 4 things
- action, especially involving scoring
- personal involvement in action
- close score (so challenging contest)
- opportunities to reaffirm friendships during game
what should occur at age 13 in regards to specialisation vs diversification?
important period for development of identity and competence
reduction in no. of activities
increase in practice time / intensity
increased emphasis on competition
more support provided by family and friends
what should occur at age 16 in regards to specialisation vs diversification?
children should specialise and invest in this training
as between 16-20 56% of total practice time in that sport occurs
can make independent decison about benefits and costs of intense focus required
early specialisation (deliberate practice) vs early diversification (deliberate play) pros and cons?
pros of early specialisation:
- getting closer to 10 000 hours promotes confidence in the sport
- better for early maturation sports like gymnastics and figure skating
cons of early specialisation:
- world champions with much less than 10 000 hours of practice so not essential to be an elite athlete
- if not enjoying your sport, for example forced into it by your parents, at an early age then more likely to drop out
- poor for your mental health as lots of pressure and reduced social life and missing out on other opportunities
pros of early diversification:
- promotes intrinsic motivation
- able to find the sport that you’re best at instead of forced into one sport
- transferable skills across sports
- deliberate play is more accessible to more people and doesn’t require lots of equiptment or commitment
cons of early diversification:
- might not reach 10 000 hours
cons of placing kids into football academies so early?
1 in 100 make it as a pro
so just exposing young kids to lots of pressure and failure
not developing children for life outside of sport as in tier 1 are full-time at academies e.g schooling, psychology and training so no skills for when they don’t make it
if only looking up to 8 y/o then may miss players who became better later on and how to tell if athlete going to be elite as young as 5
why is football a special case in terms of early specialisation?
lots of money when spot a player and sell them
academies governed by FA so have to have certain amount fo training etc.
in some academies, banned from playing any other sport but in others they are allowed (limiting transferable skills)
what are the 3 mian activities performed in football academies?
- practice
- formal activity with aim of improving performance - competition
- formal activity with aim of winning matches (not as fun as if deliberate play) - play
- informal activity with aim of fun/enjoyment
what did Helsen et al, 1998 find about the practice hours of different level of Belgian football players after 18 years in career?
professional - 9332 (partial support for Ericcson but obviously professional players would have more practice as they are paid and it is their job to do so
semi-professional - 7449
amateur - 5079
what was said by Williams and Ford, 2012 regarding early specialisation and diversification?
and the relation of this to football?
limitations with the self-report methods used?
engage early but also doing playful activities and specialising later on
supporting Cote’s model
also found differences between those who made it (pros) in football from academies and those who didn’t
used participation history questionnaire to test engagement in football specific activities and in other sports to test early engagement and later specialisation - issues with this as having to rememeber back to when very young and hours in very specific categories
small sample size
difference found that those kept on generally started playing football a year earlier and lots more activity hours when younger (play&practice) 100h extra combined - so in line with Ericcson’s work and in support of academy existence
all played lots of sports in childhood
what was found by Ford et al, 2012 about international differences in sporting activities?
found that mix of different pathways
in england was the highest number of sports played
328 16 y/o elite football players across 7 countries (much bigger and more diverse sample than Williams and Ford study)
started later in academies in Brazil but earlier in portugal
generally 5 y/o when started playing and around 11 years when joined elite scheme and after 10 years around 4550 hours of football played
lots of sports played e.g basketball and athletics
only 132 played 2 other sports in adolescence compared to around 229 in childhood
implications for practice of research on early specialisation and diversification found by Ford et al, 2010?
difficulties in applying the research to training?
asked youth football coaches what went on in practice
lots of drill activities for skills - means not coaching other skills e.g cognitive decision-making which are equally important to match play
due to hard to get coaches to listen to you as have to communicate info in a way they will understand to translate research appropriately as not aware of it
want the biggest retunr for the least amount of time and change so what can be manipulated easily without much alteration
what was found about type of practice leading to better perceptual cognitive expertise in specific sport?
better perceptual cognitive expertise when playing football specific activities
what was found about features of training in youth cricket players?
Low et al, 2013 combined 69% training form 19% playing form 12% on transitions
recreational
50% playing form
elite
0% playing form (imitating match play)
what is involved in the early engagement pathway?
current model for elite young players
childhood
- meaningful amounts of practice
- meaningful amounts of sport specific play activity
- low amounts of other sports
adolescence
- large amounts of soccer practice
- reduced play activity
- amount of competition activity increases
- deliberate practice now used to further improve performance (beyond plateau)
figures on cost of a gold medal in GB olympics?
is there benefits to this?
2012 london - 9m per gold medal
2008 beijing - 12.36m per gold medal
athletes are doing better but sports participation is down suggesting inspiring not taking place
what is the genetic component to talent identification?
may have an effect but can’t do much about it at the moment
HERITAGE study - Bouchard
influence of genetic factors on health and disease risk
VO2 max and responsivity to training stimulus is genetically constrained regardless of training
COL5A1 gene -
flexibility of ligaments/tendons
predisposition to injury of these
VDR - (vitamin D receptor)
associated with strength/power
ACE -
endurance and strength/power
ACTN3 gene -
restricting capabiity to be elite at 100m as for power
largest genetic advantage is the presence of Y-chromosome (male) e.g 9.2% difference in the marathon between men and women (records)
what is talent identification and what are the 3 strategies for it?
discovery and observation of talent in a specific sport
- talent selection
- talent detection
- talent transfer
what is meant by talent selection as one of the strategies in talent identification?
the process whereby talented athletes are selected from WITHIN their sport based on their performance, physical and physiological testing
and based on coaches expert opinions on their skill, technique, attitude and potential
the most used method but not shown to be particularly successful
what are the type of errors in inclusion and exclusion in talent identification?
deselection of an athlete who will make it (type 2) - under-utlisation of talent pool and tends to lead to complete de-selection from any sports due to becoming disillusioned which has implications for health issues in society
selection of an athlete who won’t make it (type 1) - very expensive in time and resources
select athlete who would make it but error of action where don’t develop them properly to enable them to reach best potential
what is meant by talent detection as one of the strategies in talent identification?
involves recruiting athletes from OUTSIDE the sport who have physical and physiological attributes associated with success at the high performance level in that sport
transferable specific skills
how does John Keogh suggest the talent idenfification process should work in British Rowing World Class Start?
successes of this programme and structure?
- identify talent
- identify key performance factors e.g aerobic capacity
- validate tests (baseline of national team athletes)
- quick tests (lots can do quickly)
- not sport specific (raw talent) - coach this talent to win medals
easier to do this for physiological based than skill based sports
in this programme, 12 have been selected to represent GB at london 2012 (25% of squad taken) so 2000 people have been tested to find one olympian
- 9 centres surrounded by schools so easily accessible etc. each with a talent development coach and performance development coach (coach to athlete 1:6-8)
- high level of training
- regular testing camps
- continual comparison to world best times
example of marathon runners exhibiting similar genes and culture?
all top marathon times made by kenyans from a certain tribe
have shared genes e.g long legs and good at high altitude
also, culture influences as aware that they have the capabiities based on other people’s successes from that country
how did Gagne (2004) define talent?
outstanding mastery of developed abilties or skills and knowledge in at least 1 field of human activity to a degree that places an individual among the top 10% of age peers who are or have been active in that field
what are the 2 factors to be identified in a talented athlete?
static
- disposition to perform well
- motivation to perform well
- social enviro to help them to perform well
- current results that are outstanding in camparison to peers
dynamic
- develop actively
- in an active pedagogical accompanied change process
- tranied intentionally for later peak performance
what are the 2 main issues in talent identification?
two issues:
- best predictors of intial task performance are not usually the same as the best determinants of final task performance
- distinction between what characterises a champion and the qualities required to become a champion (assessing current athletes doesn’t tell us which characteristics they possessed when younger to get them there, only what they had at present)
what information is used in talent ID?
natural abiities
skill sets
multi-dimensional performance characteristics:
- anthropometric (height/weight)
- physiological (aerobic/anaerobic capacities) but only trainable up to a certain point so natural ability given from genes
- technical (dribbling)
- tactical (appreciation of space/perceptual)
- psychological (resilience/personality)
what is meant by talent transfer as one of the strategies in talent identification?
process of identifying athletes with extensive and adaptable training backgrounds and transferable skills
assists them in transitioning and succeeding in a sport with comparable athlete profile e.g physical, skill components required etc.
- most cost effective and efficient way of developing talent
- most successful one when used amongst olympians e.g out of 12 divers in athens olympics, 10 started in gymnastics
what did Durandt et al, 2011 find about continuation of selection in rugby players from u13 to u16&18?
76% of players selected for u13 tournament didn’t play in u18 tournament
numbers playing went from 349 (identified as talented at their age) to 84, showing early identification not a very good method in identifying top level performers at a young age
what did Vaeyens et al, 2009 find about early talent identification?
found that structured programmes in adolescence not associated with better sucess in elite sport
what are the findings about age started in different sports for olympians?
ice hockey and swimming started really young
sports like softball started at over 16 years of age
the age of starting doesn’t really influence your future ability in the sport just matters that playing any sport from a young age, not the one specific to future
overall stats regarding sucess of talented identification?
rost et al, 1989 - 131 selected at 10 and within 2 years, group reduced to 32
gullich et al, 2005
11 287 members of elite sport schools
only 1.7% of former members got a medal in a senior competition
what is meant by recyling in talent identification and what does it involve?
recycling - if not sucessful in one sport then move onto another
- second chance opportunities
- improved chance of success
- increased return on investment - money not necessarily lost if succeed at another sport
- reduced uncertainty - feel better if know if unsuccessful can transfer across to another sport
what are the advantages of talent transfer?
- highly motivated and goal oriented as want to succeed enough to move sports
- accomplished in current sport
- great self-management skills
- good work ethic
- proven performer in competition environments
- no bad technical habits
what did Gulbin et al, 2013 find about linear progression through talent systems?
leisure local club regional club state level (only here can predict whether will make it to national level so not necessarily linear progression) national club
what did Gullich and Emrich, 2012 find about long-term sustainability in development of success?
and explanations of this?
found those who succeeded in their sports had no more practice in their domain sport than those who didn’t suceed - no evidence for superiority of early specialisation
varied paths to the top
only difference that had much more experience in other sports
benefits of variability:
- experience more stimuli to develop learning
- able to try more to see what better at
- exposed to different opportunities for problem solving
is early specialisation supported?
no, much more support for talent transfer and variability of taking part in lots of sports
what are 5 personal factors differentiating elite over non-elite athletes?
- birthdate - relative age effect as over representation of those born at start of year
not a consistent effect though and may disappear/reverse by the elite level and have longer careers - genetics - explained 20-80% of variance at non-elite level and heritability component of e.g throwing, agility, RT etc.
heritable but reversible - gene expression (can be affected by enviro e.g mothers activity levels may affect activity levels of children which changes gene expression and in funcitonal adaptation to changing)
effect not if but which (definitely do have an effect on performance) - anthropometric and physiological factors - height, weight, VO2 max, (an)aerobic capacity
use limited by: individual variability in growth and instability of physiology in adolescence
biological maturation looked at instead - psychological skills and motivational orientations - more successful athletes display e.g higher levels of motivation and perceived control, reater resistance to choking and range of mental skills
elite athletes: self-determined motivation and extrinsic and base competence perceptions on personal improvements - personality traits - greater conscientiousness, optimism and adaptive perfectionism
what is the Wonderlic Test used in the NFL?
test used in combine to assess aptitude for learning and problem-solving in wide range of occupations
score of 20 indicates average intelligence but from other professions average score is 24 but e.g in chemsit 31
higher scorers: learn more rapidly, master more complex material and exercise better judgement
lower scorers: need more time, detailed instruction and less challenging job routines
highest scores seen in offensive tackle and quarterback whereas lowest for full and halfback
but no evidence that this test provides an indication of the standard of the player
what are the environmental factors differentiating elite over non-elite athletes?
- birthplace - populations between 10-30000 more likely to produce olympic athletes in uk and areas more than this are disadvantaged and better when educated in small village e.g more attention to you if good, better behaved students, fewer distractions from sport etc.
but to do with where you’re born or where you develop? - support progammes (not particularly effective) - success at junior level does not predict success at elite level
earlier admittance to these programmes leads to earlier exit of the sport
super-elite are recruited to support programmes at later than elite (so support programmes not helping) - support from family and coaches - crucial in developmental years and coaches can enhance development of psychological skills and mental toughness
what was found to differentiate between super-elite and elite athletes in the great british medallist study?
experience of a negative life event coupled with positive sport related event
need for success
importance of sport over other aspects
diversified sporting experiences
ruthlessness in pursuit of sporting goals
better performance under pressure
- most predictive of success: adversity in early life at same time of successful period during their sport which might link to the Relative Age Effect and showing resilience *
but not causation between negative life experience and sporting success as retrospective study - so not a predictor - but might enable choice between 2 similarly matched athletes
what may be a description of talent development in sport?
converting natural abilities into specific choreographed skills
what did Vaeyens et al describe as the 5 stages of talent development?
- detection
- identification - those going to be good
- confirmation - through testing
- selection
- development
- easy to see what it looks like on paper but harderin practice
what did Gulbin & Weissensteiner, 2012 suggest are various realistic elements of talent development?
1) refine skill acquisition
2) interpret biological e.g bio-banding (play against maturation levels not age) and cog maturation
3) monitor physiological training loads - young athletes vulnerable to stress injuries during growth spurts so development may occur through e.g occlusion paradigms instead, includes being sensitive to key developmental transitions
4) sensitive of over-reaching
5) improve tactical decision making
6) keep athletes motivated through achievable but challenging training
7) identify new cohorts of talent
- reductions in P.E
- very unspecialised teachers in P.E
describe Gagne’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent? (DMGT)
- model of talent development
developed for education - characterises development of top 10% - still very relevant to sport
development process described as transformation of gifts into talent - looking for gifted athletes not talent (turned into this) - through processes of maturation, learning, training and practice
DP (giftedness) influenced by 3 catalysts -
- intrapersonal - individual characteristics e.g learn-ability
- environmental - e.g location, supportive parents etc.
- chance - e.g whether spotted by scout, replace someone with injury, never get injured - very big factor as all characteristics possessed, we have by chance
interaction of intrapersonal, developmental, environmental and chance factors to form talented individual
differentiates giftedness (constituent elements/potential) and talent (end product/accomplishment)
more of a heavy focus on talent identification not development
what is Collins et al, approach for transforming giftedness to talent?
emphasises importance of psychological characteristics
e.g doggedness - not wanting to give up
what did Abbott & Collins, 2004 suggest about factors of talent development?
capacity of child to develop their psychological skills and characteristics - e.g have to have perseverance, perform under pressure, make sacrifices
no point on focusing on models, have to focus on what happens in practice and how does it work
again, retrospective
stages:
- sampling - athlete identity developed
- specialising - sport prioritised
- investment - world class performance at senior level
- maintenance - consistent world class performance
what does Dweck mean by growth and fixed mindset?
how to get away from this?
growth mindset - understanding that your abilities can be developed , effort worthwhile, challenges embraced, getting things wrong is positive
engaged with error through brain activation, aiming to correct it
when taught to adopt this mindset, showed sharp increase in maths grades compared to drop in controls - transform meaning of effort and difficulty to mean greater learning possibilities
fixed mindset -
ability fixed, effort seen as fruitless, challenges avoided and getting something wrong negative
running from difficulty as shown from no brain activity when made error, so running not engaging with it
get away from this by praising processes not just success/failure e.g in maths to encourage resilience, more effort and perserverance
in line with Ericson’s theory of deliberate practice but also includes attitudes and evaluations
application of fixed and growth mindset to sports?
growth - more likely to engage with challenges and keep going through set backs
perceive success as improving - need to emphasise this in development programmes so should develop this mindset in sporting sphere as can be changed
fixed - often with successful junior athletes as when faced with actual opposition, haven’t learnt how to deal with it
perceive success when don’t make mistakes and don’t fail so always looking for confirmation of abilities externally as can’t generate on your own
transform failed action to ‘i am a failure’ and instead need this to be altered to ‘how can i succeed next time’
what does Duckworth mean by ‘GRIT’?
origins in education - all her papers on her website
looked at who was successful and perserverent in different challanging domains
- biggest predictor of this was grit: passion and perserverance for the long-term, marathon not sprint
e.g significantly more likely to graduate if matched on everything other than ‘grit’ 2007
talent doesn’t = grit as talented individuals don’t always stick with it, may actually be inversely proportional
develop grit through growth mindset (Dweck) - not believing failure is a permanent
talent x effort = skill
skill x effort = achievement so effort (grit) is key e.g Ronaldo
what is resilience as defined and described by Sarkar?
ability to withstand and perform under pressure, keep working, and overcome problems
develops through interaction of individual and environment (often under studied)
good enviro for resilience has balance between challenge and support :
- high challenge but low support = unrelenting
- high support but low challenge = comfortable
- high + high = facilitative (safe to make and learn from mistakes and risks, aiming for feedback, competitiveness used for positive so helps to develop resilience)
what did Collins & MacNamara suggest about how athletes deal with trauma in aiding development?
way we deal with setbacks which creates opportunity to succeed
without them, don’t learn how to become successful
traumas occuring in childhood often seen in elite athletes as enables them to develop resilience and grit
BUT also opposite where traumas lead to problems in later life
difference between resilience and grit/growth mindset?
what do they agree on?
resilience - important thing is to evaluate what can be learnt from mistakes
grit/growth mindset - developing strategies to succeed
both agree that have to learn from both success and failure - learn from good and bad points
what was found about sport-based trauma in 20 international athletes by Savage et al, 2017?
applications of this?
found adverse experience can be stimulus for future success
when difficulty e.g injury, missed selection, and drop in progression, then had massive improvement straight after - example of development in response to challenge
if always succeeding then will never learn to overcome mistakes and how to grow as not challenged
ethical implications for application of this research as can’t add an element of trauma into childhood sport - instead just create a challenging enviro with opportunity to fail so can push limits without traumatising them
- for gifted individuals, might need more challenging environments than being provided at that age level
- give psychological skills to get over hardships and use challenge to develop
what are the key psychological skills needing to be trained to overcome difficulties in sport and progress after?
- motivation - desire to improve
- self-belief - confidence despite challenges and maintain their own (growth mindset)
- focus on goals
- attribute successful performances to their own work ethic
- recognise strengths and weaknesses
- good level of social support
- application of learning
what % of children in schools get the recommended 1 hour of vigorous activity a day?
19%
as PE first subject to be dropped for better acadmeic grades
is deliberate play and elimination of competiion before aged 13 realistic now?
less playground and park spaces
less time for parental supervision
most sport therefore played in organised settings
so if there is to be competition, to make it appropriate, make it fun
what did Collins et al, 2014 find about differentiation in success based on dealing with experiences and set backs?
successful individuals continually learned from experiences had and set-backs e.g being sent to another club on loan
looked at developmental, environmental stressors, bodily stressors, psychological states, damaging behaviours as set backs and traumas
not to do with differences in amount of trauma (hinted at in great british medallist projects) but in differences in how dealt with the trauma i.e in a more positive way, developing resilience etc.
what did Collins et al, 2016 propose about implementing trauma within training?
- teach psychological skills to cope with traumas
- use constructive challenges to use these skills developed, as opposed to introducing actual trauma into child’s lives
- refine these skills to deal with challenges better
- give more challenges, etc.
what did MacNamara and Collins, 2013 develop regarding psychological skil development for trauma?
Psychological Characteristics of Developing Excellence Questionnaire
questions regarding:
- support for long-term success
- imagery use during practice and competition - debatable as some people don’t have this ability
- coping with performance and developmental pressures - set-backs
- ability to organise and engage in quality practice
- evaluating performances and working on weaknesses
- support from others to compete to my potential
what did MacNamara, 2010 find when comparing characteristics of elite performers in literature vs their sample?
some in common
found in their sample:
competitiveness, commitment, vision of what taking to succedd (as opposed to goal setting), imagery, working on weaknesses, coping under pressure (common), game awareness, self-belief
found in the literature:
motivation, commitment, goal setting, quality practice, imagery, realistic performance evaluation, coping under pressure and social skills
what did Thomas & Wilson, do with their programme of ‘shaping the game’, compared to previous training?
findings regarding in match play and opinions?
what debate does this surround?
introducing kids to rugby, shaping the game, retaining players and developing talent
6 counties
identified 5 themes from interviews with coaches: enjoyment, deliberate play, late specialisation skills, multi-sport participation, appropriate adult involvement
proposing smaller, tag rugby for younger age groups, 4v4 (U7&8), for U9 introduced the tackle, U10, the scrum and 8v8, for U11 the lineout
previously: U7&8 - tag 7v7 and U9 - tackle, scrum, lineout, 9v9 etc.
FINDINGS
twice as many successful passes and tries, more ball in play and more runs with the ball, more successful tackles in U9 when implementing these changes as compared to the traditional rules
opinions didn’t change much though e.g tackling most important followed by passing
- therefore, this pilot is now being implemented in practice, for safety, enjoyment, more skilled players etc.
- despite the issues of quality of coaches/their education and winning hearts and minds of others
debate as to whether tackling should be taught younger - to learn how to do it properly or older - to minimise injury when younger
what is said in the international olympic committee consensus statement on youthh athletic development?
2015
sport becoming more professional and competitive
may increase risk of burn-out, injuries and health problems
should avoid early specialisation and early diversification and sampling of many sports
what was said by MacNamara et al, 2015 about deliberate preparation?
- children do need coaching as skills won’t develop on their own
- practice conditions need to be flexible and versatile
- compare to use being taught how to read and write and same thing weith sport - need to be taught
describe bio-banding?
what are the consequences of grouping by age instead of maturation level?
WHAT - grouping players based on attributes associated with growth and maturation - rather than age - so optimal environment for different maturation levels to thrive - not suppressed by lack of physicality when not matured and able to develop technical ability when more matured
practical applicaiton of literature on Relative Age Effect
WHY - when more matured, can place more emphasis on physical attributes and less on technical attributes of the game - deceives coaches as not able to show that technically gifted if not matured yet, indeed poor prediction of success of early maturation in later success
HOW - need variety of oppositions to maximise abilities, so not just bio-banding and not just age groups
WHO - used in majority of premier league youth academies
what did Cumming et al, 2017 find about bio-banding?
matured players found these games more challenging (in a good way)
less matured had more opportunities to develop technical abilities and display these to others
providing more equal setting for both levels of maturation to thrive
differential learning vs contextual interference?
- 4 key differences between them?
DL
- no movement repeated
- no error correction as ovement is self-directed (no coach involvement)
- no ideal movement pattern
- exploration based learning
CI
- performer alternates between skills (some repitition will occur)
- coach corrects errors
- ideal movement pattern
- Controlled manipulation of the learning environment
describe the use of anticipation in experts?
- how do experts use this?
- how tested?
experts have an increased ability to detect relative info in the enviro e.g Ronaldo not requiring visual info (when lights turned off) to score SO the ability to correctly anticipate movements is a characteristic of expertise
use anticipation to deal with the time constraints of skilled performance through prediction of future movements, thus enabling time for correct movement response
tested using occlusion paradigms
discuss occlusion paradigms?
- 2 types
- how conducted
- why used
to answer essay q on this:
- from research: what info required to predict outcome (event) and when (temporal) and what has been found in different sports
- strengths and weaknesses of these paradigms
- what has been found about differences between experts and non-experts
temporal - removes info at certain time points before and after event from internal perspective e.g as if you’re the goalie
- differentiates when experts and non-experts able to predict outcome
- doesn’t tell you exactly what info is used to predict outcome
- WHEN NOT WHAT
spatial/event - removes specific aspects of environmental information (could wear occlusion goggles for this)
- tells use which info used to make decisions
- tells us which info experts need to anticipate the movement outcome
- WHAT NOT WHEN
usually conducted using video paradigms
used to identify which aspects of info experts/non-experts use to inform their movements e.g where goalkeepers look during a penalty and when and allows comparisons between different skill levels
