Exploring the Orthogonal Relationship between Controlled and Automated Processes in Skilled Action
- PDF / 398,000 Bytes
- 17 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 96 Downloads / 184 Views
Exploring the Orthogonal Relationship between Controlled and Automated Processes in Skilled Action John Toner 1
& Aidan
Moran 2
# The Author(s) 2020
Abstract Traditional models of skill learning posit that skilled action unfolds in an automatic manner and that control will prove deleterious to movement and performance proficiency. These perspectives assume that automated processes are characterised by low levels of control and vice versa. By contrast, a number of authors have recently put forward hybrid theories of skilled action which have sought to capture the close integration between fine-grained automatic motor routines and intentional states. Drawing heavily on the work of Bebko et al. (2005) and Christensen et al. (2016), we argue that controlled and automated processes must operate in parallel if skilled performers are to address the wide range of challenges that they are faced with in training and competition. More specifically, we show how skilled performers use controlled processes to update and improve motor execution in training contexts and to stabilise performance under pressurised conditions. Keywords Control . Automaticity . Continuous improvement . Expertise . Skilled action
1 Introduction Skilled action in sport is widely believed to be facilitated by an absence of conscious attention to the mechanics of one’s movements during skill execution (see Masters and Maxwell, 2008, for a review). Anecdotal evidence to support this idea abounds in sport.
* John Toner [email protected] Aidan Moran [email protected]
1
Department of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull HU6 7RX, UK
2
School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
J. Toner, A. Moran
For example, when the triple-major champion golfer Padraig Harrington won the 2007 open Championship in Carnoustie after a play-off against Sergio Garcia, he described his thoughts as he prepared for his final putt: ‘no conscious effort whatsoever went into that putt. There were no thoughts about ‘this is for the Open’… I stroked it in’ (cited in Jones, 2007, p. 12). Supporting this idea, evidence from the experimental psychological literature would suggest that engaging in any form of conscious control will hamper athletic performance. To illustrate, performance pressure may lead athletes to become increasingly conscious of their movement and suffer a concomitant breakdown of automated skills (Beilock et al., 2002; Masters & Maxwell, 2008) – a phenomenon popularly known as ‘paralysis-by-analysis’ (Beilock, 2010). More generally, a considerable body of experimental evidence highlights the debilitating effect of ‘conscious processing’ (or paying attention to one’s action during motor skill execution) on skilled athletes’ movement and performance (e.g., Beilock and Carr, 2001). These findings support the predictions made by a number of highly influential models of skill acquisition which place controlled and automated processing at opposite ends of a single continuum (e.g., Shif
Data Loading...
