Advancing Contextual Interference: Addressing Methodological Debates, Reflecting on Meta-Analytic Practices and Generalizability, and Guiding Future Directions in Motor Learning

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Advancing Contextual Interference: Addressing Methodological Debates, Reflecting on Meta-Analytic Practices and Generalizability, and Guiding Future Directions in Motor Learning
Language: English
Authors: Achraf Ammar (ORCID 0000-0003-0347-8053), Khaled Trabelsi (ORCID 0000-0003-2623-9557), Atef Salem (ORCID 0000-0003-0680-6841), Haitham Jahrami (ORCID 0000-0001-8990-1320), Wolfgang I. Schöllhorn (ORCID 0000-0002-4558-1991)
Source: Educational Psychology Review. 2025 37(3).
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 41
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: Context Effect, Interference (Learning), Perceptual Motor Learning, Meta Analysis, Generalizability Theory, Epistemology, Retention (Psychology), Research Methodology
DOI: 10.1007/s10648-025-10043-1
ISSN: 1040-726X
1573-336X
Abstract: Given that the contextual interference (CI) phenomenon is one of the most extensively studied and debated topics in motor learning--featured prominently in scientific literature, textbooks, and practitioner guides--it is unsurprising that recent meta-analyses on the topic have generated critical discussion and contrasting interpretations. This article responds comprehensively to the commentary by Czyz (2025) on our recent meta-analytic work evaluating CI effects across acquisition, retention, and transfer phases in sports related movements. We systematically address their methodological critiques, clarify inclusion decisions, and challenge inconsistencies in their own analytic approach and interpretation--particularly regarding baseline equivalence, study exclusion, and epistemologically inadmissible generalized claims. In addition to a detailed point-by-point rebuttal, we provide a comparative evaluation of recent CI-related meta-analyses and offer a broader reflection on the current state of meta-analytic practice in motor learning. We highlight concerns related to statistical ritualism, inconsistent quality control, and the growing redundancy of evidence syntheses. Finally, we present targeted recommendations for future research, including the need for high-quality randomized controlled trials, field-specific quality appraisal tools, and comprehensive umbrella reviews to better integrate fragmented evidence. Collectively, these reflections aim to enhance methodological standards and ensure more context-sensitive and scientifically sound conclusions in CI and broader motor learning research.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1478116
Database: ERIC
Be the first to leave a comment!
You must be logged in first