Variability of Practice, Information Processing, and Decision Making—How Much Do We Know?

Abstract

Decision-making is a complex action requiring efficient information processing. Specifically, in movement in which performance efficiency depends on reaction time, e.g., open-loop controlled movements, these processes may play a crucial role. Information processing includes three distinct stages, stimulus identification, response selection, and response programming. Mainly, response selection may play a substantial contribution to the reaction time and appropriate decision making. The duration of this stage depends on the number of possible choices an individual has to “screen” to make a proper decision. Given that reaction time is crucial in many sports, the possibilities of reducing it through practice are very tempting. The information processing and its relationship to the manner an individual is practicing are discussed. Especially the variability of practice issues will be explored. In variable practice conditions, an individual has to react to one or more stimuli and has to produce one of the many variations of the same movement or different movements they learned. One has to identify a stimulus appropriately and has to select a response optimally, i.e., choosing from as few choices as possible to reduce the reaction time. On the other hand, in constant practice conditions, an individual can be exposed to one or many stimuli. Still, there is only one variation of the movement that can be executed in the presence of a learned stimulus. Based on the information processing theory and the results of the research focusing on variability of practice, I discuss how the practice conditions may affect reaction time and, as a result, the decision-making process. I conceptually frame the possible implications of practice conditions on decision making related to information processing. In this review, a possible mechanism and relationship between practice conditions and decision-making are presented. Future research directions are presented.

Commentary: Variability of Practice, Information Processing, and Decision Making—How Much Do We Know?

“…These data then extended the efficacy of practice variability beyond skill generalizability to include skill retention (see Czyz, 2021 ). Shea and Kohl ( 1990 ) entertained two potential explanations for their finding.…”

“…Similar to Czyz (2021) in the target article, Kohl (1990, 1991) initial theorizing as to how practice variability supports skill memory was borrowed from the initial formulations of the forgetting-reconstruction Magill, 1983, 1985) and the elaboration (Shea and Zimny, 1983) accounts for contextual interference (CI) effect. The CI phenomenon addresses a learning advantage afforded by using interleaved practice (IP) compared to repetitive practice (RP) when acquiring multiple skills concurrently.…”

“…IS SUFFICIENT TO ADVANCE SKILL MEMORY? Czyz (2021) was correct in noting that variability of practice is illdefined in the extant literature. The present commentary focuses on the concept of variability in terms of the intentional practice of skills that are variations of a target skill.…”

“…We conclude that variable experiences scheduled in this format facilitate learning but remain more cautious in regards to the more general claim that practice variability advances skill acquisition. Kohl (1990, 1991) attempted to shed light on the efficacy of practice variability not for skill generalizability, overtly addressed by schema theory (Schmidt, 1975) and noted by Czyz (2021), but for skill retention for which schema theory was ambivalent and to which less experimental rigor has been exerted. This involved examining the delayed retention of an isometric force production skill following repeated reproduction of only a single target force (i.e., specific practice) compared to that achieved after practice of this target skill embedded in practice with other similar forces (i.e., variable practice) (Shea and Kohl, 1990).…”

“…The review by Czyz ( 2021 ) should be applauded for revisiting the role of practice variability for skill acquisition especially given ongoing interest in the identification of “best-practices” in instructional and therapeutic contexts as well as the need for the development of a more mechanistic framework within which memory for skill is viewed. The present commentary reviews work (Shea and Kohl, 1990 , 1991 ), absent in the target article, which was designed to uncover how variability rather than specificity bestows a skill learning advantage.…”