Collins Dave, Carson Howie J, Rylander Pär, Bobrownicki Ray
Human Performance Science Research Group, Institute for Sport, Physical Education and Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Grey Matters Performance Ltd, Stratford-Upon-Avon, UK.
Sports Med. 2025 Apr;55(4):799-810. doi: 10.1007/s40279-024-02161-7. Epub 2024 Dec 21.
With sport coaches adopting and working toward increasingly evidence-grounded approaches to practice, skill acquisition has appropriately become a critical area for consideration. As part of this growing interest in skill acquisition, the ecological dynamics approach has garnered attention amongst scholars and practitioners with myriad media (e.g. peer-reviewed articles, books, podcasts and social-media outputs) extolling its benefits. In doing this, however, the available guidance, advice and scholarship have typically positioned ecological dynamics as a direct competitor to existing or traditional cognitive approaches, advising against practical integration of approaches due to theoretical incompatibility. As a standalone approach, we are concerned that there are mechanistic and epistemological issues and inconsistencies that prevent experimental comparisons and limit its applicability, novelty and capability to comprehensively address real-world athlete and coach needs. Based on this, in this Current Opinion paper, we lay out these concerns and critically examine the clarity, coherence and consistency of the approach and its associated literature. In concluding, we also suggest that a more evidence-based and mechanistically driven approach that draws upon a wider set of theoretical perspectives can offer greater benefit to athletes, coaches and practitioners in real-world sport.
随着体育教练采用并致力于越来越多地基于证据的实践方法,技能习得已理所当然地成为一个关键的考量领域。作为对技能习得日益增长的兴趣的一部分,生态动力学方法在学者和从业者中引起了关注,众多媒体(如同行评议文章、书籍、播客和社交媒体产出)都称赞其益处。然而,在这样做的过程中,现有的指导、建议和学术研究通常将生态动力学定位为现有或传统认知方法的直接竞争对手,由于理论上的不相容性,建议不要将这些方法实际整合。作为一种独立的方法,我们担心存在机械论和认识论问题以及不一致之处,这些问题阻碍了实验比较,并限制了其适用性、新颖性以及全面满足现实世界中运动员和教练需求的能力。基于此,在本篇述评文章中,我们阐述这些担忧,并批判性地审视该方法及其相关文献的清晰度、连贯性和一致性。在结论部分,我们还建议,一种更基于证据且由更广泛的理论视角驱动的方法,可以为现实世界中的运动员、教练和从业者带来更大的益处。