Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42288584›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Effects of adaptive error-threshold practice on soccer instep kick learning.

Hossein Taghizadeh, Davoud Fazeli, GholamHossein Nazemzadegan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hossein TaghizadehDepartment of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Davoud FazeliDepartment of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. d.fazeli@shirazu.ac.ir.
GholamHossein NazemzadeganDepartment of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the effects of contextual interference and algorithmic practice with 33% or 44% error thresholds on learning the soccer instep kick in novice participants. Seventy-one inexperienced students (18-25 years) were randomly assigned to Blocked, Random, algorithmic 33%, algorithmic 44%, or control groups. After pre-testing, practice involved 324 trials over two days from 5, 6, and 7 m distances. Algorithmic groups began with blocked practice and progressed to serial or random structures based on accuracy thresholds (≥ 67% for 33%; ≥ 56% for 44%). Blocked and random groups practiced according to classical random and blocked order. Retention and transfer tests occurred two days post-practice; psychological pressure was induced via financial incentives, audience, and social comparison. Acquisition results showed no group differences, but algorithmic 33% improved significantly from day 1 to 2. In retention, both algorithmic groups outperformed random and control groups. In the transfer test, algorithmic 44% surpassed all groups, including algorithmic 33%. Heart rate increased post-stress induction, confirming manipulation success, yet no group differences emerged under psychological pressure. The findings may be interpreted within the challenge point framework, although the underlying informational mechanisms were not directly assessed. As an initial application of algorithmic practice to a field-based motor skill, the present results suggest that error-threshold tuning may represent a promising avenue for future motor learning research.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceLearningSoccerAdolescentAdultAlgorithmsFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleYoung AdultChallenge point frameworkError rateTask variation

Identifiers

PMID42288584
PMCPMC13518949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.