I'm looking forward to reading that when it comes out. I've pointed that direction a bit when writing about co-adaptive landscapes. I'd love to chat more sometime.
I'm looking forward to reading that when it comes out. I've pointed that direction a bit when writing about co-adaptive landscapes. I'd love to chat more sometime.
Also, you mention the question about additive contributions vs synergies. We tested that question with multifractal and surrogate analysis in a dyadic task and also in an 11v11 match with vector autoregressive modeling. Chapters 4 and 6 might be of interest.
www.researchgate.net/publication/...
Chapter Seven reviews the thesis and summarises its contributions to research. The thesis advances the study of flow in sport through metatheoretical analysis, theoretical development, the introduction of new methods to the field, and empirical findings.
coordination through analysis of player movements in a football match. Vector autoregressive modelling of time-variation in local Hurst exponents identified directional influences in the spread multifractal fluctuations within and across teams.
to model a self-report measure of flow as a dependent variable, finding that the multifractal properties of both attackers and defenders were significant predictors of flow. Chapter Six extends the cascade modelling strategy to the level of intra- and inter-team
Thesis while also bringing a measure of anticipatory synchronisation developed in the study of chaotic systems to the behavioural sciences. Chapter Five utilises cascade dynamics
would involve nonlinear cross-scale interactivity. The results of multifractal analysis and surrogate analysis identified cross-scale interactions in all trials, supporting the hypothesis of interaction dominant dynamics. Chapter four introduces the cascade modelling strategy used throughout the
Chapter Three develops a theoretical account of flow in sport and generates testable hypotheses about the dynamics of performance behaviour in flow activities. Chapter Four begins the empirical portion of the thesis by testing the hypothesis that performance behaviour in a dyadic 1v1 task
Chapter Two uses the framework developed in Chapter One to query the metatheoretical foundations of the concept of flow and identify difficulties prevalent framings may create for flow research. Beginning from the alternative foundations of the ecological metatheory,
Chapter One provides a background for the thesis by identifying a common language for analysing the ontological nature of sports and the experiences they are capable of providing.
To support these aims, the theoretical and empirical contributions of this thesis focus on the fundamental action and perception processes underlying competitive coordination to facilitate new directions for flow research.
Abtract:
This thesis utilises an ecological dynamics perspective to investigate the concept of flow experiences in the domain of sport. The study of flow in sport is motivated by the objective of understanding the nature of sport and the experiences which may motivate individuals to engage in it.
Here is the accepted version of my thesis. A huge thanks to my supervisory team and everyone who supported me.
A few chapters are already published some are still in review, so this is a sneak peek for anyone interested in the empirical findings.
www.researchgate.net/publication/...
Santiago, this is a really cool study. I'd love to see more evolutionary ecology and biological thinking applied to team sports.
Photo of 3-versus-3 football game
1/12 Really proud of this paper! We borrowed tools from biology to ask a simple question: does who you play with actually matter in football? (Spoiler: it does, a lot.) 𧬠π€ β½
Paper here: authors.elsevier.com/a/1mUusArnpe...
I'm pleased to share a preprint of a chapter I wrote for an upcoming book on embodied cognition. I try to tackle some thorny questions surrounding unit and scale as they relate to symbols and dynamics in cognitive science.
www.researchgate.net/publication/...
Madhur poses some excellent questions to predictive processing approaches in cognitive science here. I'd be curious how proponents would respond!
www.researchgate.net/publication/...
Produced famous player x" or something like that.
I don't think these people would ever care what skill acquisition science finds. They are just not open to science a lot of the time, in my experience.
There are many training activities that are quite obviously motivated by the idea that skill acq is the storage of context-independent movement patterns.
I don't think it's some great evil for coaches to use those activities but the justification is usually just "well this coach did it and they
Thanks for signposting the barrett et al article, i hadn't seen it. What I mean by "received view" of skill is that coaches may not know or explicitly think about it but it pervades practice via copying and means you mention.
coaching practice, and I don't have data on the prevalence of these practices so I'd be open to changing my mind if shown convincing data to the contrary.
Curious on your thoughts.
I don't make it some big moral issue and I think kids being active, outside, interacting with caring adults is certainly a net positive so inefficient skill acq doesn't trigger me like it does some, but I do think we can do better.
Of course, some of this is anecdotal. I don't study
coaches right now (lovely people). What's painfully obvious is that the recieved view of coaching is centered around getting kids to repeat movements and then hopefully stand in the right areas of the pitch.
So, it does feel to me that this is where coaches start out more often than not.
training event it seems clear to me that this individual-level definition of skill still motivates practice design. Nick Gearing's work has also shown that football academy coaches are still attached to individual technical training.
Anecdotally, I'm working with a few new grassroots football
For example, practice fidelity will defined differently depending on whether you think skill is an adaptive functional performer-environment relationship or a property of the individual performer.
I still see a lot of advocacy for the latter, and if you roll up to a random youth sports
What evidence supports this form of inclusivity? I have a sense that supporters of mixing feel they are inherently less dogmatic or more nuanced, but is enforcing C (A+B) any different than enforcing A or B?
Second is the idea that CLA creates straw men.
that I find a bit concerning right now.
First is a sort of generic "both/and" inclusivity that doesn't allow for preference/selectivity.
I think we need to have a serious discussion about whether doing both A and B is actually doing A and B, or a third thing C.
Thanks for these thoughtful insights.
I think we've agreed that these LP vs NLP studies have key limitations as a general format (relying on group mean and assuming the purpose of skill acq research is to draw a box around around a set of activities).
But there are two trends in skill acq
Damian has arrived! Also, really enjoyed co-authoring this chapter with this group. Check it out here π
www.frontiersin.org/journals/psy...
@jcassidysport.bsky.social thoughts?