What Variability tells us about motor expertise: measurements and perspectives from a complex system approach

Komar, John; Seifert, Ludovic; Thouvarecq, Régis

doi:10.1051/sm/2015020

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Movement variability is the variance of movements generated by an individual under the same task conditions (Newell and Slifkin 1998) (i.e., repeated movements cannot be completely identical). The adaptive and functional role of movement variability is regulated by system 'degeneracy' which refers to an individual's ability to vary motor behaviour structurally to deal with information-rich, dynamic environments from moment to moment without compromising function (Seifert, Button, and Davids 2013;Komar et al 2015). This is exemplified in body segment orientation during the cutting manoeuvres, which are commonly used in Parkour as Parkour Traceur 9 explained: I think I adapted my Parkour practice experiences a little bit when I started American football.…”

Section: Perceptual Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Parkour-style training environments for athlete development: insights from experienced Parkour Traceurs

Strafford

Davids

North

et al. 2020

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary models of motor learning implicate the value of Parkour-style training as an activity to enrich athletic performance in different sports. We explored Parkour Traceurs' experiential knowledge on the range of physical, perceptual, psychological and social skills that they perceive to be developed during Parkour practice and performance. We also investigated their recommendations on how to design Parkour practice to facilitate the development of foundational performance behaviours. Experienced male Parkour Traceurs (n=14) were interviewed using an open-ended, semi-structured approach, with a two-stage thematic analysis being conducted to identify themes. The analysis identified two dimensions: Skills Developed Through Parkour and Recommendations for Designing Parkour Training Environments. Parkour Traceurs outlined numerous physical (locomotor skills; endurance; strength; agility; balance), perceptual (multi-limb coordination; control precision; rate control; response orientation), psychological (problem solving; stress relief; self-efficacy; risk management) and social (networking; initiative; social perceptiveness; receptiveness to feedback) capacities and skills that could be augmented through Parkour training. Parkour Traceurs explained how indoor Parkour environments should promote creative and exploratory movement behaviours that enable physical conditioning, whilst enhancing decision making and action functionality. Responses suggest that these aims are often achieved by designing a modular practice landscape where Parkour Traceurs manipulate the spacing, orientation and angles of bars and wall set-ups to facilitate the development of different perceptual, cognitive and physical skills. In conclusion, this study provides insights on how affordances offered by a Parkour environment could be integrated into practice to enhance athlete self-regulation and transfer of functional behaviours to team sport performance.

show abstract

Section: Perceptual Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Parkour-style training environments for athlete development: insights from experienced Parkour Traceurs

Strafford

Davids

North

et al. 2020

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering that both groups presented similar intracycle velocity variation, elite swimmers likely adopted strategies to manage velocity variations along the highly constrained environment (aquatic) and task (sprint). In fact, it is becoming an accepted fact that movement variability is an emergent behavior under several constraints regarding inter-limb coordination [ 35 , 36 ] and spatiotemporal kinematics [ 12 , 16 , 37 ]. Despite the novelty of this study, there are other ways to assess swimming velocity, some of which are more accurate and complete, but also more time-consuming (e.g., motion capture systems [ 20 ]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Velocity Variability and Performance in Backstroke in Elite and Good-Level Swimmers

Fernandes

Goethel

Marinho

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backstroke swimming, a cyclic and continuous movement, displays a repeating structure due to the repeated action of the limb, presenting similar (but not identical) cycles. Some variability is generated by instabilities, but this may play a functional role in the human performance, allowing individual adaptations to constraints. The current study examined the role of velocity variability in backstroke performance, hypothesizing that this variable is associated with swimmers’ performance. Sixteen elite and fifteen good-level swimmers were video recorded in the sagittal plane when performing 25 m backstroke at maximal intensity in order to determine hip velocity and mean velocity, stroke rate, stroke length and indexes of coordination/synchronization. Lyapunov maximal exponent and sample entropy were also calculated for successive cycles. The elite swimmers’ performances were more unstable (0.1742 ± 0.1131 versus 0.0831 ± 0.0042, p < 0.001) and complex (0.9222 ± 0.4559 versus 0.3821 ± 0.3096, p < 0.001) than their good-level counterparts, but intracycle velocity variation did not differ (11.98 ± 3.47 versus 12.03 ± 3.16%, p > 0.05). Direct relationships were observed between mean velocity and stability (r = 0.40, p = 0.03), as well as with complexity (r = 0.53, p = 0.002), with intracycle velocity variation and complexity also being related (r = 0.38, p = 0.04). Backstroke performance is associated with velocity variability, with elite swimmers being able to control it through several adaptations, overcoming the high drag and inertia.

show abstract

“…We characterize variability across repeated stimulus cycles and across participants and compare this variability across frontal, sagittal, or transverse planes. While variability is important to quantify in motor control, there is no agreed upon interpretation (Komar et al 2015). Some argue variability in performance is minimized as an individual increases skill level (Schmidt 2003), while others posit that variability is inherent to complex systems and should be investigated as a clue to transitions in motor learning and interactions between neural, biomechanical, and environmental factors (Newell & Corcos 1993;Magill 2014), and still others suggest variability within individual body segments is a positive sign as long as variability in the overall movement goal is sufficiently low (Latash et al 2002).…”

Section: Second Which Plane Of Motion Is Associated With the Most Vamentioning

confidence: 99%

Specificity and variability of trunk kinematics on a mechanical horse

Goodworth

Barrett

Rylander

et al. 2019

Human Movement Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As perturbation training is gaining popularity, it is important to better understand postural control during complex three-dimensional stimuli. One clinically relevant and commonly used threedimensional stimulus is found in hippotherapy and simulated hippotherapy on a mechanical horse. We tested nine healthy participants on a horse simulator, measured head and trunk kinematics, and characterized data in time (root-mean-square and variability) and frequency (amplitude spectra, gains, and phases) domains. We addressed three fundamental questions: 1) What is the specificity of postural responses to the simulator? 2) Which plane of motion is associated with the most and least variability (repeatable movements across repeated stimuli and across participants)? 3) To what extent are postural responses influenced by different degrees of stability (addition of pelvis straps and trunk support)? We found head and trunk responses were highly specific to the threedimensional simulator perturbation direction and frequency. Frontal plane responses had the least variability across repetitions and participants whereas transverse motion was most variable. Head motion was more variable that the trunk at low frequencies and exhibited a marked decrease in tilt in the sagittal plane. Finally, the inclusion of pelvis straps had minimal effect on kinematics at low frequencies but altered higher frequencies; whereas added trunk support reduced head and trunk responses to perturbations and altered timing characteristics in all three planes. In conclusion, the present study suggests that frontal plane motion was under a high level of control, and results support the idea that specific head and trunk postural responses can be elicited from a complex three-dimensional stimuli, such as those found in hippotherapy. Researchers and clinicians can use results from this study to help interpret variability, implement mechanical adjustments to stability, and assess responses in pathological populations.

show abstract

What Variability tells us about motor expertise: measurements and perspectives from a complex system approach

Cited by 30 publications

References 66 publications

Designing Parkour-style training environments for athlete development: insights from experienced Parkour Traceurs

Designing Parkour-style training environments for athlete development: insights from experienced Parkour Traceurs

Velocity Variability and Performance in Backstroke in Elite and Good-Level Swimmers

Specificity and variability of trunk kinematics on a mechanical horse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About