ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
Is there a contextual interference effect for sub-elite alpine ski racers learning complex skills?
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical analysis of skier activity in giant slalom.PloS one · 2026Article
- International Ski and Snowboard Federation (FIS) consensus statement on training and testing in competitive alpine and freestyle skiers and snowboarders.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific understanding of the contextual interference effect stems mainly from studies on unskilled participants learning artificial laboratory tasks. Although one goal of such studies is to extrapolate the findings to include real-world learning situations such as sports, this generalization is not straightforward. This study tested the contextual interference effect with 66 sub-elite, competitive alpine ski racers who learned a new movement pattern-the pumping technique to increase velocity in slalom-by practicing this skill in three different slalom courses over a 3-day training period. The interleaved group practiced all three courses each day in a semi-random order. In contrast, the blocked group practiced only one course each day, which was randomized and counterbalanced across the participants in this group. A retention test was delivered 72 h after the last practice day. In contrast to our hypothesis, the interleaved group did not display significantly better retention than the blocked group. The interleaved group's performance was also not significantly attenuated during skill learning compared to the blocked group. Our results underscore the importance of conducting motor learning experiments in natural environments to understand the conditions that facilitate learning beyond the laboratory environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.