We explore the problem of variability of practice from an applied perspective. Different types of variability, i.e., numerosity, heterogeneity, situational diversity, and scheduling are presented from the motor learning perspective, including theories, models, and concepts. We present the implications of applying variability into practice, the advantages, and problems arising while varying the practice. Finally, we propose a pragmatic model of applying variability in motor practice to assist coaches in designing effective training programs. Answers to three simple questions guide coaches to different methods of introducing variability in the practice. We present also key principles, coaches have to follow, in order to apply variability appropriately.
VandenBosGR (ed). APA Dictionary of Psychology. American Psychological Association, https://dictionary.apa.org/ (2007, accessed 29 June 2021).
2.
RavivLLupyanGGreenSC. How variability shapes learning and generalization. Trends Cogn Sci2022; 26: 462–483.
3.
RanganathanRNewellKM. Changing up the routine: intervention-induced variability in motor learning. Exerc Sport Sci Rev2013; 41: 64–70.
4.
SheaCHKohlRM. Specificity and variability of practice. Res Q Exerc Sport1990; 61: 169–177.
5.
SchmidtRALeeTDWinsteinCJ, et al.Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. 6th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2018.
6.
BoyceBACokerCABunkerLK. Implications for variability of practice from pedagogy and motor learning perspectives: finding a common ground. Quest2006; 58: 330–343.
7.
CzyżSH. Variability of practice, information processing, and decision making—how much do we know?Front Psychol2021; 0: 306.
8.
KimTWrightDLFengW. Commentary: variability of practice, information processing, and decision making—how much do we know?Front Psychol2021; 0: 3265.
9.
BernsteinNA. O postrojenii dwiżenij. Moskva: Medgiz. In: English: the coordination and regulation of movements, 1967. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press, 1947.
10.
AdamsJA. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. J Mot Behav1971; 3: 111–149.
11.
SchmidtRA. A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychol Rev1975; 82: 225–260.
12.
SchmidtRA. The search for invariance in skilled movement behavior. Res Q Exerc Sport1985; 56: 188–200.
13.
SchmidtRA. Motor schema theory after 27 years: reflections and implications for a new theory. Res Q Exerc Sport2003; 74: 366–375.
14.
NewellKM. Constraints on the development of coordination. In: WadeMGWhitingHTA (eds) Motor development in children: aspects of coordination and control. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1986, pp.341–360.
15.
ThelenESmithLB. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1994.
16.
GuadagnollMALeeTD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav2004; 36: 212–224.
17.
WulfGLewthwaiteR. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychon Bull Rev2016; 23: 1382–1414.
18.
BattigWF. Facilitation and interference. In: BilodeauEA (ed) Acquisition of skill. New York: Academic Press, 1966, pp.215–244.
19.
SheaJBMorganRL. Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn Mem1979; 5: 179–187.
20.
MoxleySE. Schema: the variability of practice hypothesis. J Mot Behav1979; 11: 65–70.
21.
DavidsKAraújoDHristovskiR, et al.Ecological dynamics and motor learning design in sport. In: HodgesNJWilliamsAM (eds) Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice. London: Routledge, 2012, pp.112–130.
22.
ButtonCSeifertLChowJY, et al.Dynamics of skill acquisition : an ecological dynamics approach. 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2020.
23.
HodgesNJLohseKR. An extended challenge-based framework for practice design in sports coaching. J Sport Sci2022; 40: 754–768.
24.
WulfGLewthwaiteR. Translating thoughts into action: optimizing motor performance and learning through brief motivational and attentional influences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci2021; 30: 535–541.
25.
MagillRAHallKG. A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Hum Mov Sci1990; 9: 241–289.
26.
BuszardTReidMKrauseL, et al.Quantifying contextual interference and its effect on skill transfer in skilled youth tennis players. Front Psychol2017; 8: 1931.
27.
MagillRAndersonD. Motor learning and control: concepts and applications. 12th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2021.
28.
KeetchKMSchmidtRALeeTD, et al.Especial skills: their emergence with massive amounts of practice. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform2005; 31: 970–978.
29.
ChuaLKDimapilisMKIwatsukiT, et al.Practice variability promotes an external focus of attention and enhances motor skill learning. Hum Mov Sci2019; 64: 307–319.
30.
SheaCHWulfG. Schema theory: a critical appraisal and reevaluation. J Mot Behav2005; 37: 85–102.
31.
WilliamsAMHodgesNJ. Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: challenging tradition. J Sports Sci2005; 23: 637–650.
32.
MorenoFJOrdoñoEM. Variability and practice load in motor learning. RICYDE Rev Int Ciencias del Deport2015; 11: 62–78.
33.
LeeTDWishartLR. Motor learning conundrums (and possible solutions). Quest2005; 57: 67–78.
34.
SimonDABjorkRA. Metacognition in motor learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn2001; 27: 907–912.
35.
KrauseLFarrowDPinderR, et al.Enhancing skill transfer in tennis using representative learning design. J Sport Sci2019; 37: 2560–2568.
36.
GentileAM. Skill acquisition: action, movement, and neuromotor processes. In: CarrJHShepherdRB (eds) Movement science: foundations for physical therapy. Rockville, MD: Aspen, 2000, pp.111–187.
37.
GentileAM. A working model of skill acquisition with application to teaching. Quest1972; 17: 3–23.
38.
WüestSvan de LangenbergRde BruinED. Design considerations for a theory-driven exergame-based rehabilitation program to improve walking of persons with stroke. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act2014; 11: 119–129.
39.
KeetchKMLeeTDSchmidtRA. Especial skills: specificity embedded within generality. J Sport Exerc Psychol2008; 30: 723–736.
40.
BreslinGHodgesNJSteensonA, et al.Constant or variable practice: recreating the especial skill effect. Acta Psychol (Amst)2012; 140: 154–157.
41.
SimonsJPWilsonJMWilsonGJ, et al.Challenges to cognitive bases for an especial motor skill at the regulation baseball pitching distance. Res Q Exerc Sport2009; 80: 469–479.
42.
NabavinikMAbaszadehAMehranmaneshM, et al.Especial skills in experienced archers. J Mot Behav2018; 50: 249–253.
43.
CzyżSHBreslinGKwonO, et al.Especial skill effect across age and performance level: the nature and degree of generalization. J Mot Behav2013; 45: 139–152.
44.
CzyżSHMossSJ. Specificity vs. generalizability: emergence of especial skills in classical archery. Front Psychol2016; 07: 1178.
45.
ThorndikeEL. Educational psychology. New York: Columbia University Press, 1913.
46.
WoodworthRSThorndikeEL. The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions. (I). Psychol Rev1901; 8: 247–261.
47.
VickersJN. Decision training: an innovative approach to coaching. Can J Women Coach2003; 3: 1–7.
48.
TravassosBGonçalvesBMarcelinoR, et al.How perceiving additional targets modifies teams’ tactical behavior during football small-sided games. Hum Mov Sci2014; 38: 241–250.
49.
ChowJYDavidsKButtonC, et al.Nonlinear pedagogy in skill acquisition: An introduction. London: Routledge, 2015. DOI: 10.4324/9781315813042.
50.
SchnotzWKürschnerC. A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educ Psychol Rev2007; 19: 469–508.
51.
SwellerJChandlerP. Evidence for cognitive load theory. Cogn Instr1991; 8: 351–362.
52.
SwellerJ. Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci1988; 12: 257–285.
53.
SwellerJ. The effect of task complexity and sequence on rule learning and problem solving. Br J Psychol1976; 67: 553–558.
54.
FittsPMPosnerMI. Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1967.
55.
KlappSTMotor response programming during simple choice reaction time: the role of practice. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform1995; 21: 1015–1027.
56.
KlappSTReaction time analysis of two types of motor preparation for speech articulation: action as a sequence of chunks. J Mot Behav2003; 35: 135–150.
57.
SchornJMKnowltonBJ. Interleaved practice benefits implicit sequence learning and transfer. Mem Cogn2021; 49: 1436–1452.
58.
PorterJMBeckermanT. Practicing with gradual increases in contextual interference enhances visuomotor learning. Kinesiology2016; 48: 244–250.
59.
PorterJMMagillRA. Systematically increasing contextual interference is beneficial for learning sport skills. J Sport Sci2010; 28: 1277–1285.
60.
LandinDHebertEP. A comparison of three practice schedules along the contextual interference continuum. Res Q Exerc Sport1997; 68: 357–361.
61.
CokerCA. Motor learning and control for practitioners. 5th ed. New York, NY: Routledge, 2021.
62.
LinCHJKnowltonBJChiangMC, et al.Brain–behavior correlates of optimizing learning through interleaved practice. Neuroimage2011; 56: 1758–1772.
