Cognitive control, intentions, and problem solving in skill learning

Abstract

We investigate flexibility and problem solving in skilled action. We conducted a field study of mountain bike riding that required a learner rider to cope with major changes in technique and equipment. Our results indicate that relatively inexperienced individuals can be capable of fairly complex 'on-the-fly' problem solving which allows them to cope with new conditions. This problem solving is hard to explain for classical theories of skill because the adjustments are too large to be achieved by automatic mechanisms and too complex and rapid to be achieved by cognitive processes as they are usually understood. A recent theory, Mesh, can explain these results because it posits that skill-specific cognitive abilities develop during skill learning and that control typically involves an interplay between cognitive and automatic mechanisms. Here we develop Mesh further, providing a detailed explanation for these problem solving abilities. We argue that causal representation, metacognitive awareness and other forms of performance awareness combine in the formulation and control of action strategies. We also argue that the structure of control present in this case is inconsistent with Bratman's model of intentions, and that, in the face of high uncertainty and risk, intentions can be much more labile than Bratman recognises. In addition, we found limitations and flaws in problem solving which illuminate the representations involved. Finally, we highlight the crucial role of social and cultural learning in the development of complex skills.

Addressing complexity in motor learning: Practical strategies for teachers and coaches

“…However, over longer temporal scales, such as modifying technical execution in sports gestures, flexibility contributes to increased movement-level stability of the new solution. This dynamic stabilizing effect prevents the young athlete from reverting to previous movement patterns (Christensen & Bicknell, 2022).…”

(Re)conceptualizing movement behavior in sport as a problem-solving activity

“…This could point to a further understanding of how cognitive processes may be situated in the emergence of movement behavior (6,31). Though there have been questions raised over a lack of explanation about how cognition may function in ecological theories (3,5), perception could be considered a fundamental type of cognition (13). Additionally, cognition may also be considered the coordination of intended interactions with the performance environment (32).…”

“…Various conceptual propositions have been advanced to describe how athletes may coordinate, control, and organize movements under the challenging demands of competitive sporting environments ( 3 – 5 ). Traditional models, derived from cognitive and experimental psychology, have been adopted, primarily taking an organism-centered perspective by emphasizing psychological and neural processes, such as memories, knowledge acquisition, and the processing of information indirectly through representations stored within the brain ( 3 , 6 ).…”

TRACK—a new algorithm and open-source tool for the analysis of pursuit-tracking sensorimotor integration processes

“…PCT-based models were able to simulate and predict individuals’ performance in a pursuit-tracking paradigm (Parker et al, 2017 ). Along these lines the field has also moved to more computational accounts of how sensorimotor integration processes are accomplished (Franklin & Wolpert, 2011 ; Körding & Wolpert, 2004 ) and how such processes can contribute to aspects of cognitive control and intentions to act (Christensen & Bicknell, 2022 ).…”