An Ecological Dynamics Framework for the Acquisition of Perceptual–Motor Skills in Climbing

  • Ludovic Seifert
  • Dominic Orth
  • Chris Button
  • Eric Brymer
  • Keith Davids
Chapter

Abstract

Uncertainty in extreme sports performance environments, like rock and ice climbing, provides considerable psycho-emotional and physiological demands which challenge the acquisition of perceptual–motor skills. An ecological dynamics theoretical framework adopts concepts and tools of nonlinear dynamics and ecological psychology to investigate and model the relationships that emerge in extreme sports between athletes and their performance environments. In this relation, the interactions of athletes with key objects, surfaces, events and significant others during a sport like climbing emerge from interdependent personal, task and environmental constraints on performance. Performance behaviours emerge through the continuous and active exploration of environmental properties by individual athletes. Properties of rock cliffs, icefalls and mountains provide a high level of uncertainty due to continuous weather-driven changes. Their unpredictability signifies that performance may be considered as an ongoing coadaptation of climber’s behaviours to dynamically changing, interacting constraints, individually perceived and encountered. In this chapter, we consider the continuous interactions between climbers and their environment to understand how they can be coached to perceive key environmental properties when climbing and adapt their behaviours towards achieving performance goals.

Keywords

Ecological dynamics Climbing Movement variability Affordances Degeneracy Skill acquisition Expertise Representative design 

References

  1. 1.
    Phillips K, Sassaman J, Smoliga J. Optimizing rock climbing performance through sport specific strength and conditioning. Strength Cond J. 2012;34(3):1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moulin C. Solos. Chamonix: Guérin edition; 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Child G. Mixed emotions: mountaineering writings. Seattle: Mountaineers Books; 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davids K, Araujo D, Hristovski R, Passos P, Chow JY. Ecological dynamics and motor learning design in sport. In: Hodges NJ, Williams AM, editors. Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge (Taylor and Francis Group); 2012. p. 112–30.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davids K, Button C, Bennett SJ. Dynamics of skill acquisition: a constraints-led approach. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2008.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davids K, Handford C, Williams AM. The natural physical alternative to cognitive theories of motor behavior: an invitation for interdisciplinary research in sports science? J Sports Sci. 1994;12:495–528.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seifert L, Orth D, Hérault R, Davids K. Metastability in perception and action in rock climbing. In: Passos P, Barreiros J, Cordovil R, Araújo D, Melo F, editors. XVIIth international conference on perception and action. Estoril: FMH Editions, Portugal; 2013.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Araújo D, Davids K, Hristovski R. The ecological dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2006;7(6):653–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gibson J. The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 1979.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kelso JAS. Dynamic patterns: the self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT; 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Newell KM. Constraints on the development of coordination. In: Wade MG, Whiting HTA, editors. Motor development in children. Aspects of coordination and control. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff; 1986. p. 341–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brunswik E. Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychol Rev. 1955;62(3):193–217.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brunswik E. Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1956.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Araújo D, Davids K, Passos P. Ecological validity, representative design, and correspondence between experimental task constraints and behavioral setting: comment on Rogers, Kadar, and Costall 2005. Ecol Psychol. 2007;19(1):69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pinder RA, Davids K, Renshaw I, Araújo D. Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2011;33(1):146–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davids K, Araújo D. The concept of “Organismic Asymmetry” in sport science. J Sports Sci. 2010;13(6):633–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carroll TJ, Barry B, Riek S, Carson RG. Resistance training enhances the stability of sensorimotor coordination. Proc Biol Sci Roy Soc. 2001;268(1464):221–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fawcett T. Mental toughness a phenomenological perspective. In: Gucciardi D, Gordon S, editors. Mental toughness in sport: developments in theory and research. New York: Taylor & Francis Group/Routledge; 2011. p. 9–29.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Newell KM, Liu YT. Functions of learning and the acquisition of motor skills (with reference to sport). Open Sports Sci J. 2012;5:17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Newell KM. Change in movement and skill: learning, retention and transfer. In: Latash ML, Turvey MT, editors. Dexterity and its development. Mahwah: Erlbaum; 1996. p. 393–430.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Issurin V. Training transfer: scientific background and insights for practical application. Sports Med. 2013;43(8):675–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosalie S, Müller S. A model for the transfer of perceptual-motor skill learning in human behaviors. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2012;83(3):413–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rosalie S, Müller S. Expertise facilitates the transfer of anticipation skill across domains. Q J Exp Psychol. 2014;67(2):319–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moore C, Müller S. Transfer of expert visual anticipation to a similar domain. Q J Exp Psychol. 2014;67(1):186–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Guinness Book of World Records. 2011.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bourdin C, Teasdale N, Nougier V, Bard C, Fleury M. Postural constraints modify the organization of grasping movements. Hum Mov Sci. 1999;18:87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boschker MSJ, Bakker FC. Inexperienced sport climbers might perceive and utilize new opportunities for action by merely observing a model. Percept Mot Skills. 2002;95(1):3–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Seifert L, Wattebled L, L’Hermette M, Herault R. Inter-limb coordination variability in ice climbers of different skill level. Educ Phys Train Sport. 2011;1(80):63–8.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bourdin C, Teasdale N, Nougier V. High postural constraints affect the organization of reaching and grasping movements. Experimental brain research. Experimentelle hirnforschung. Expérimentation Cérébrale. 1998;122(3):253–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Testa M, Martin L, Debû B. Effects of the type of holds and movement amplitude on postural control associated with a climbing task. Gait Posture. 1999;9(1):57–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Testa M, Martin L, Debû B. 3D analysis of posturo-kinetic coordination associated with a climbing task in children and teenagers. Neurosci Lett. 2003;336(1):45–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Seifert L, Wattebled L, Herault R, Poizat G, Adé D, Gal-Petitfaux N, Davids K. Neurobiological degeneracy and affordance perception support functional intra-individual variability of inter-limb coordination during ice climbing. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e89865.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Seifert L, Wattebled L, L’Hermette M, Bideault G, Herault R, Davids K. Skill transfer, affordances and dexterity in different climbing environments. Hum Mov Sci. 2013;32(6):1339–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cordier P, Mendès-France M, Bolon P, Pailhous J. Entropy, degrees of freedom, and free climbing: a thermodynamic study of a complex behavior based on trajectory analysis. Int J Sport Psychol. 1993;24:370–8.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cordier P, Mendès-France M, Pailhous J, Bolon P. Entropy as a global variable of the learning process. Hum Mov Sci. 1994;13:745–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sanchez X, Lambert P, Jones G, Llewellyn DJ. Efficacy of pre-ascent climbing route visual inspection in indoor sport climbing. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012;22(1):67–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nougier V, Orliaguet JP, Martin O. Kinematic modifications of the manual reaching in climbing: effects of environmental and corporal constraints. Int J Sport Psychol. 1993;24:379–90.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pijpers JR, Oudejans RD, Bakker F, Beek PJ. The role of anxiety in perceiving and realizing affordances. Ecol Psychol. 2006;18(3):131–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Batoux P, Seifert L. Ice climbing and dry-tooling: from Mont Blanc to Leman. Chamonix: JM Editions; 2007.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Blanc-Gras J, Ibarra M. The art of ice climbing. Chamonix: Blue Ice Edition; 2012.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chow JY, Davids K, Hristovski R, Araújo D, Passos P. Nonlinear pedagogy: learning design for self-organizing neurobiological systems. New Ideas Psychol. 2011;29(2):189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Warren WH. The dynamics of perception and action. Psychol Rev. 2006;113(2):358–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Passos P, Araújo D, Davids K, Gouveia L, Milho J, Serpa S. Information-governing dynamics of attacker–defender interactions in youth rugby union. J Sports Sci. 2008;26(13):1421–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Newell KM, Corcos DM. Variability and motor control. Human kinetics: Champain; 1993.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Newell KM, Deutsch KM, Sosnoff JJ, Mayer-Kress G. Variability in motor output as noise: a default and erroneous proposition? In: Davids K, Bennet SJ, Newell KM, editors. Movement system variability. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2006. p. 3–23.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Slifkin AB, Newell KM. Is variability in human performance a reflection of system noise? Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 1998;7(6):170–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Davids K, Glazier PS, Araújo D, Bartlett RM. Movement systems as dynamical systems: the functional role of variability and its implications for sports medicine. Sports Med. 2003;33(4):245–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Van Emmerik REA, Van Wegen EEH. On variability and stability in human movement. J Appl Biomech. 2000;16:394–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Seifert L, Button C, Davids K. Key properties of expert movement systems in sport : an ecological dynamics perspective. Sports Med. 2013;43(3):167–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sparrow WA, Newell KM. Metabolic energy expenditure and the regulation of movement economy. Psychon Bull Rev. 1998;5(2):173–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Edelman GM, Gally J. Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(24):13763–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mason PH. Degeneracy at multiple levels of complexity. Biol Theory. 2010;5(3):277–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Davids K, Glazier PS. Deconstructing neurobiological coordination: the role of the biomechanics-motor control nexus. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2010;38(2):86–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Withagen R, Chemero A. Affordances and classification: on the significance of a sidebar in James Gibson’s last book. Philos Psychol. 2012;25(4):521–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Withagen R, De Poel HJ, Araújo D, Pepping GJ. Affordances can invite behavior: reconsidering the relationship between affordances and agency. New Ideas Psychol. 2012;30(2):250–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Boschker MSJ, Bakker F, Michaels CF. Memory for the functional characteristics of climbing walls: perceiving affordances. J Mot Behav. 2002;34(1):25–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Fajen BR, Riley MR, Turvey MT. Information, affordances, and the control of action in sport. Int J Sports Psychol. 2009;40(1):79–107.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jacobs DM, Michaels CF. Direct learning. Ecol Psychol. 2007;19(4):321–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sibella F, Frosio I, Schena F, Borghese NA. 3D analysis of the body center of mass in rock climbing. Hum Mov Sci. 2007;26(6):841–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Seifert L, Orth D, Hérault R, Davids K. Affordances and grasping patterns variability during rock climbing. In: Davis T, Passos P, Dicks M, Weast-Knapp J, editors. Studies in perception and action XII: seventeenth international conference on perception and action. Estoril: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis; 2013. p. 114–8.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Johnson HW. Skill = speed x accuracy x form x adaptability. Percept Mot Skills. 1961;13:163–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Steck U. Speed. Chamonix: Guérin edition; 2014.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Fryer S, Dickson T, Draper N, Eltom M, Stoner L, Blackwell G. The effect of technique and ability on the VO2–heart rate relationship in rock climbing. Sports Technol. 2012;5(3–4):143–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Pezzulo G, Barca L, Lamberti Bocconi A, Borghi A. When affordances climb into your mind: advantages of motor simulation in a memory task performed by novice and expert rock climbers. Brain Cogn. 2010;73:68–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Collins L, Collins D. Conceptualizing the adventure-sports coach. J Adventure Educ Outdoor Learn. 2012;12(1):81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Fryer S. Physiological and psychological contributions to on-sight rock climbing, and the haemodynamic responses to sustained and intermittent contractions. Christchurch: University of Canterbury; 2013.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Fuss F, Niegl G. Instrumented climbing holds and performance analysis in sport climbing. Sports Technol. 2008;1(6):301–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sanchez X, Boschker MSJ, Llewellyn DJ. Pre-performance psychological states and performance in an elite climbing competition. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2010;20(2):356–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hardy L, Hutchinson A. Effects of performance anxiety on effort and performance in rock climbing: a test of processing efficiency theory. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2007;20(2):147–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Seifert L, Coeurjolly J, Hérault R, Wattebled L, Davids K. Temporal dynamics of inter limb coordination in ice climbing revealed through change-point analysis of the geodesic mean of circular data. J Appl Stat. 2013;40(11):2317–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Brymer E, Hughes T, Collins L. The art of freestyle. Bangor: Pesda Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Brymer E, Oades L. Extreme sports: a positive transformation in courage and humility. J Humanist Psychol. 2009;49(1):114–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Brymer E. Risk and extreme sports: a phenomenological perspective. Ann Leis Res. 2010;13(1,2):218–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Brymer E, Davids K. Ecological dynamics as a theoretical framework for development of sustainable behaviours towards the environment. Environ Educ Res. 2013;19(1):45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Brymer E, Renshaw I. An introduction to the constraints-led approach to learning in outdoor education. Aust J Outdoor Educ. 2010;14(2):33–41.Google Scholar
  77. 77.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ludovic Seifert
    • 1
  • Dominic Orth
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chris Button
    • 3
  • Eric Brymer
    • 2
  • Keith Davids
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Sport SciencesCentre d’Etude des Transformations des Activités Physiques et Sportives (CETAPS) – EA 3832, University of RouenMont-Saint-AignanFrance
  2. 2.School of Exercise & Nutrition ScienceQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.School of Physical Education, Sport and Exercise SciencesUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  4. 4.Centre for Sports Engineering ResearchSheffield Hallam UniversitySheffieldUK
  5. 5.Sport and Health SciencesFiDiPro Programme, University of JyväskyläJyväskylänFinland

Personalised recommendations