Thread by @PsychScientists

So this thread explaining a key issue in the debate seemed to be useful so I thought I’d add another; this one around the question of #itdepends and how a key difference of values feeds confusion in the debates

🧵

https://twitter.com/psychscientists/status/1634144889846878209

One of the things that confuses/annoys people is the eco psych advocacy for not using all available conceptual tools and frameworks when designing training. Broadly, we push for *just* using the ecological principles underpinning representative learning design

This is a major source of confusion and public relations shenanigans. We get marketed as zealots and cultists, and as crazy for rejecting the seemingly obvious fact that which approach is best depends on lots of factors - how can one approach claim to have all the solutions?

The key idea is nicely summed up by this tweet; EcoD isn’t a method, it’s a lens (another way of saying theory, really). It’s a coherent set of principles for generating and evaluating training activities

https://twitter.com/CalJonesJudo/status/1589182892587905024

When you have a coherent lens to work with, bouncing between approaches that don’t share the lens is simply incoherent. It’s like committing to the idea that the world is round but then sometimes accepting that it might be flat

EcoD is unique in sports science by being such a coherent lens. The rest of sports science/coaching is a mish-mash of ideas and frameworks cobbled together with no specific guiding theory. I’m not being rude: this variety is basically what #itdepends pitches as a strength

So, crudely, on one side we have #itdepends where doing whatever it takes is valued and seen as the right way to do business. On the other, you have EcoD which is one broad set of principles designed to cohere and which says some things are true and some things aren’t

The net result is the asymmetry we see in the debate. EcoD isn’t worried about #itdepends at the level of methods; it’s worried about it at the level of theory/lens, a worry not shared by traditional coaching. This is the source of another point of confusion in the debates

Again, at this point, I’m not arguing for one approach over the other; just trying to articulate an issue that causes confusions. Obviously I’m strongly committed to the value of picking a lane eg avant.edu.pl/wp-content/upl… but I could be wrong and that’s ok

But the #itdepends argument is effectively a clash of values, hence it gets heated & hence it always feels like we’re talking past each other. Keep that in mind, is all, so we can not get mired in this argument and instead move onto developing evidence bases for the one you like