Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues
The question of what explains individual differences in expertise within complex domains such as music, games, sports, science, and medicine is currently a major topic of interest in a diverse range of fields, including psychology, education, and sports science, to name just a few. Ericsson and coll...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-08-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01134/full |
id |
doaj-e38b990365124cecad42a61439ce63bd |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-e38b990365124cecad42a61439ce63bd2020-11-25T03:42:15ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782020-08-011110.3389/fpsyg.2020.01134518237Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of IssuesDavid Z. Hambrick0Brooke N. Macnamara1Frederick L. Oswald2Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United StatesDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United StatesDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Rice University, Houston, TX, United StatesThe question of what explains individual differences in expertise within complex domains such as music, games, sports, science, and medicine is currently a major topic of interest in a diverse range of fields, including psychology, education, and sports science, to name just a few. Ericsson and colleagues’ deliberate practice view is a highly influential perspective in the literature on expertise and expert performance—but is it viable as a testable scientific theory? Here, reviewing more than 25 years of Ericsson and colleagues’ writings, we document critical inconsistencies in the definition of deliberate practice, along with apparent shifts in the standard for evidence concerning deliberate practice. We also consider the impact of these issues on progress in the field of expertise, focusing on the empirical testability and falsifiability of the deliberate practice view. We then discuss a multifactorial perspective on expertise, and how open science practices can accelerate progress in research guided by this perspective.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01134/fulldeliberate practiceexpertisetalentskillindividual differences |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
David Z. Hambrick Brooke N. Macnamara Frederick L. Oswald |
spellingShingle |
David Z. Hambrick Brooke N. Macnamara Frederick L. Oswald Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues Frontiers in Psychology deliberate practice expertise talent skill individual differences |
author_facet |
David Z. Hambrick Brooke N. Macnamara Frederick L. Oswald |
author_sort |
David Z. Hambrick |
title |
Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues |
title_short |
Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues |
title_full |
Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues |
title_fullStr |
Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is the Deliberate Practice View Defensible? A Review of Evidence and Discussion of Issues |
title_sort |
is the deliberate practice view defensible? a review of evidence and discussion of issues |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Psychology |
issn |
1664-1078 |
publishDate |
2020-08-01 |
description |
The question of what explains individual differences in expertise within complex domains such as music, games, sports, science, and medicine is currently a major topic of interest in a diverse range of fields, including psychology, education, and sports science, to name just a few. Ericsson and colleagues’ deliberate practice view is a highly influential perspective in the literature on expertise and expert performance—but is it viable as a testable scientific theory? Here, reviewing more than 25 years of Ericsson and colleagues’ writings, we document critical inconsistencies in the definition of deliberate practice, along with apparent shifts in the standard for evidence concerning deliberate practice. We also consider the impact of these issues on progress in the field of expertise, focusing on the empirical testability and falsifiability of the deliberate practice view. We then discuss a multifactorial perspective on expertise, and how open science practices can accelerate progress in research guided by this perspective. |
topic |
deliberate practice expertise talent skill individual differences |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01134/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT davidzhambrick isthedeliberatepracticeviewdefensibleareviewofevidenceanddiscussionofissues AT brookenmacnamara isthedeliberatepracticeviewdefensibleareviewofevidenceanddiscussionofissues AT frederickloswald isthedeliberatepracticeviewdefensibleareviewofevidenceanddiscussionofissues |
_version_ |
1724526170774437888 |