The collective homeostasis model, grounded in ecological dynamics, has recently been proposed to explain the self-regulating individual-environment interactions that are necessary to conceptualizing sports teams as collective homeostatic systems. Based on these insights and given the capacity of humans to construct and adapt their ecological niches, this article explores the creation of enriching sporting contexts for the development of adaptive player-environment interactions in competitive team sports. This model of adaptation emphasizes the importance of creating a sports niche rich in shared affordances to enable team coordination through the development of individual and collective homeostasis in different sub-phases of competitive performance. In a homeostatic sports system, principles of play advocated by coaches allow players to intentionally coordinate and adapt their actions to shape the collective identity of the team. The team’s identity is shaped by the synergetic development of collective attractors (stable system states) emerging at specific scales of complexity. This is facilitated through the manipulation of constraints by the coaching and support staff. These ideas have important implications for implementing team sports training and performance preparation, helping to transform the self-regulating tendencies of players through adapting their behaviors to dynamic performance contexts.
AntónS.PottsR.AielloL. (2014). Human evolution. Evolution of early Homo: An integrated biological perspective. Science, 345(6192), Article 1236828. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1236828
2.
AraújoD.DavidsK. (2011). What exactly is acquired during skill acquisition?Journal of Consciousness Studies, 18(3-4), 7–23.
3.
AraújoD.DavidsK. (2016). Team synergies in sport: Theory and measures. Team Synergies in Sport: Theory and Measures, 7(1), 1449. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01449
4.
AraújoD.DinizA.PassosP.DavidsK. (2014). Decision making in social neurobiological systems modeled as transitions in dynamic pattern formation. Adaptive Behavior, 22(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712313497370
5.
BellC. A.CarverN. S.ZbarackiJ. A.Kelty-StephenD. G. (2019). Non-linear amplification of variability through interaction across scales supports greater accuracy in manual aiming: Evidence from a multifractal analysis with comparisons to linear surrogates in the fitts task. Frontiers in Physiology, 10, 998. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2019.00998
6.
BentoJ. O. (2007). Do Homo Sportivus: relações entre natureza, cultura e técnica. Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte, 21(4), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-55092007000400006
7.
BernsteinN. (1967). The coordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon Press.
8.
BoschF. (2020). Anatomy of agility : Movement analysis in sport. 2010 Uitgevers.
CarrollS. B. (2016). The serengeti rules: The quest to discover how life works and why it matters - with a new Q&A with the author. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc77k63
11.
CarvalhoA.AraújoD. (2022). Self-regulation of learning in sport practices: An ecological dynamics approach. Asian Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsep.2022.03.003
12.
ConnollyF. (2017). Game Changer: The art of sports science. Victory Belt.
13.
CostaI.GuilhermeJ.GargantaJ. (2015). Para um futebol jogado com ideias: Concepção, treinamento e avaliação do desempenho tático de jogadores e equipes. Appris.
14.
DamásioA. (2017). A estranha ordem das coisas: a vida, os sentimentos e as culturas humanas (1a ed.). Temas e Debates: Circulo de Leitores.
15.
DavidsK. (2015). Athletes and sports teams as complex adaptive system: A review of implications for learning design. RICYDE. Revista internacional de ciencias del deporte, XI(39), 48–61. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=71032869005
16.
DavidsK.AraújoD.ShuttleworthR. (2005). Applications of dynamical systems theory of football. In Thomas ReillyJ. C.AraújoD. (Eds.), Science and football V: The proceedings of the fifth world congress on science and football (pp. 537–550). Routledge.
17.
Davidsk.HristovskiR.AraújoD.Balague-SerreN.ButtonC.PassosP. (Eds.), (2013). Complex systems in sport (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203134610
18.
DuarteR.AraújoD.CorreiaV.DavidsK. (2012). Sports Teams as Superorganisms. Sports Medicine, 42(8), 633–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262285
19.
EdelmanG. M.GallyJ. A. (2001). Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(24), 13763–13768. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.231499798
20.
GargantaJ.GuilhermeJ.BarreiraD.BritoJ.RebeloA. (2013). Fundamentos e práticas para o ensino e treino do futebol. In TavaresF. (Ed.), Jogos desportivos colectivos: Ensinar a jogar (pp. 199–263). FADEUP.
21.
GibsonJ. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Miffin.
22.
GuignardB.ButtonC.DavidsK.SeifertL. (2020). Education and transfer of water competencies: An ecological dynamics approach. European Physical Education Review, 26(4), 938–953. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x20902172
23.
GuilhermeJ. (2004). Conhecimento específico em futebol. Contributos para a definição de uma matriz dinâmica do processo ensino-aprendizagem/treino do Jogo. Dissertação de Mestrado. FADEUP.
KelsoJ. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. The MIT Press.
26.
KelsoJ. A. S. (2022). On the coordination dynamics of (animate) moving bodies. Journal of Physics: Complexity, 3(3), Article 031001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-072X/ac7caf
27.
KendalJ.TehraniJ. J.Odling-SmeeJ. (2011). Human niche construction in interdisciplinary focus. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 366(1566), 785–792. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0306
LoboL. F. (2019). O Futebol com que Sonhei - Como eu vejo o jogo - Artes e estilos, histórias e memórias. Contraponto.
30.
MandelbrotB. (1967). How long is the coast of britain? Statistical self-similarity and fractional dimension. Science, 156(3775), 636–638. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.156.3775.636
31.
McGuckianT.AskewG.GreenwoodD.ChalkleyD.ColeM.PeppingG.-J. (2017). The impact of constraints on visual exploratory behaviour in football. In Studies in perception & action XIV: Nineteenth international conference on perception and action (pp. 85–87). Taylor & Francis.
32.
OtteF.DavidsK.MillarS.-K.KlattS. (2021). Understanding how athletes learn: Integrating skill training concepts, theory and practice from an ecological perspective. Applied Coaching Research Journal, 7, 22–32.
33.
PassosP.DavidsK.ChowJ. Y. (2016). Interpersonal coordination and performance in social systems. Routledge.
34.
RibeiroJ.DavidsK.AraújoD.GuilhermeJ.SilvaP.GargantaJ. (2019). Exploiting Bi-directional self-organizing tendencies in team sports: The role of the game model and tactical principles of play. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(1), 2213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02213
SantosR.RibeiroJ.DavidsK.GargantaJ. (2023). Sports teams as collective homeostatic systems: Exploiting self-organising tendencies in competition. New Ideas in Psychology, 71(1), Article 101048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2023.101048
37.
SeifertL.ButtonC.DavidsK. (2013). Key properties of expert movement systems in sport: An ecological dynamics perspective. Sports Medicine, 43(3), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-012-0011-z
38.
TequesP.AraújoD.SeifertL.Del CampoV. L.DavidsK. (2017). The resonant system: Linking brain-body-environment in sport performance. Proggress in Brain Research, 234(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2017.06.001
TorrentsC.BalaguéN.RicÁ.HristovskiR. (2020). The motor creativity paradox: Constraining to release degrees of freedom. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(2), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000291
