After a great Aaron Rodgers performance, you will usually hear at
least one of two phrases uttered by post-game football analysts, “he
has a great ability to see the field,” or “the game has really slowed
down for him.”
Assuming the Packers’ quarterback does not have
super-human vision or a time machine, these comments must refer to his
ability to recognize opposing defensive formations, adjust quickly to
their movements and pick out an open receiver. It is a skill that all
young players would like to have and their coaches would like to teach.
Of course, the ongoing debate in the sports world is if great
perceptual awareness and quick decision making are gifts you’re born
with or ones you can develop with practice. The extreme ends of that
continuum seem illogical, that a player can excel with no practice or
that anyone who practices enough can be a superstar. Instead, the
discussion has turned to the gray area in between looking for the right
combination and the direction of causation between the two.
At the center of the debate for the last 20 years, Florida State
psychology professor K. Anders Ericsson has held to a theory that enough
deliberate practice, described as a focused activity meant to improve a
specific skill, can make up for or even circumvent the lack of
general, innate abilities. His research has shown that about 10,000
hours of practice is the minimum required to rise to an expert level of
most knowledge domains, including sports.
Now, in a new study published in
Current Directions of Psychological Science,
psychologists David Z. Hambrick of Michigan State University and
Elizabeth J. Meinz of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville examined
this interplay between basic abilities, like working memory capacity,
and acquired knowledge learned through practice. “We have been
especially interested in the question of whether various forms of domain
knowledge moderate the impact of basic cognitive abilities on
performance,” the authors wrote.
Working memory is used in complex tasks that require holding
information in the mind while also trying to reason or comprehend the
environment. Think of Rodgers remembering the pass routes of all of
his receivers while processing the movements of eleven defenders around
him.
Hambrick and Meinz wanted to find out if the working memory of
domain experts, like Rodgers, has as much as an impact on their
performance as their years of deliberate practice and learned knowledge
of their specialized world. Previous research has shown that a
person’s working memory capacity is strongly correlated with abstract
reasoning, problem solving, decision making, language comprehension,
and complex learning.
Back in 2002, Professor Hambrick tested this relationship using a baseball domain....
<Please click here to continue reading at Axon Potential>