Sports skill practice: the pros and cons of feedback

It’s well known that feedback is a critical aspect for learning any skill. That’s why most athletes are always looking for effective feedback about their performance, and diligent coaches are always providing that feedback. Any theoretical discussion of feedback in coaching curricula is quickly reinforced in practice because the value of providing clear and effective feedback in learning situations is readily apparent. More feedback, more often is the approach most coaches take.

However, there is a big difference between short-term improvements in performance and learning that allows for long-term improvements in performance, and it is easy to mistake the two. Any activity that optimizes short-term performance is easily recognizable as changes in performance are immediate. However, strategies that optimize learning are not quite as obvious - because it takes much more time to determine if any positive change is present. While providing a lot of immediate feedback to athletes may improve their immediate short-term performance, there’s some evidence that it may impact long-term learning when compared to other strategies.

Faded feedback - best of both worlds?

‘Faded feedback’ is a feedback strategy that aims to optimize both short-term improvements in performance and long-term learning. With faded feedback, individuals are provided with a lot of feedback initially. This allows athletes to quickly understand what they need to do to be successful.  However, that feedback is quickly faded, with athletes receiving progressively less feedback over time.

This approach may lead to superior long-term learning rather than just short-term performance gains because athletes are forced to rely on their own internal sensory feedback systems to determine whether they were successful or not. When the answer is readily given by a coach or some electronic device, that self-appraisal simply isn’t necessary, so the ability to do so effectively never develops. Teasing out how different feedback schedules impact both performance and learning can be very tricky to determine for coaches because there are so many variables at play. As a result, it’s helpful to look to research for insight into how often feedback should be given to athletes in order to optimize learning over time.

New research

A group of Canadian researchers has sought to create clarity on the impact of feedback schedules on performance, retention, and transfer⁽¹⁾. The researchers recruited a group of 36 healthy adults to participate in the study. All the subjects performed a walking test where they were asked to lift their foot to predesignated heights as they walked on a treadmill. At the beginning of the testing session, each subject was assessed for their normal stepping height, as well as their maximal stepping height. The range between normal and maximal was considered their ‘stepping window’.

Once their stepping window was determined, the subjects performed eight sets of 100 step training trials, where they received a target step height on every other trial. For each 100 step trial, the subjects received a target height for 50 steps (ie half of the total steps). This target height was based upon a set percentage of each subject’s stepping window, and that percentage varied across within each stepping trial. The 50-step targets were split up into 5 groups, with each subject asked to hit a target height equal to 55, 65, 75, 85, and 95% of their individualized stepping window ten different times (see figure 1). Importantly, when subjects were asked to hit a certain percentage was randomized across the training. This ensured that each subject performed the same test on relative basis, while accounting for individual differences in walking characteristics. As you can imagine, this is a relatively challenging task and one that would be very unfamiliar to most individuals.

Figure 1: Protocol for stepping height targets