2008; Holmberg, 2009) and specifically, contextual interference (CI) programs have been proposed as valid interventions to develop CODA and SSP (Holmberg, 2009; Magill and Hall, 1990; Shea and Morgan, 1979; Wrisberg and Liu, 1991).
Participants were randomized into 5 different CI groups: i) low contextual interference (LCI) group, ii) moderate contextual interference (MCI) group, iii) high contextual interference (HCI) group, iv) variable contextual interference (VCI) group and v) control group (CG).
Second, even though the results of the present study support the idea of a significant influence of different contextual interference programs after a 3 week training period on SSP and CODA, no information was given about the evolution of these two independent motor skills during a longer period of time.
Training with moderate contextual interference (MCI) was the only one which induced improvements in both capacities (SSP and CODA).
1997) A comparison of three practice schedules along the contextual interference continuum.
1990) A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition.
The term contextual interference (CI) was used to explain this effect.
1999) The contextual interference effect with children learning an applied task.
1992) Effects of contextual interference on learning technical sports skills.
1998) A theoretical and empirical review of the contextual interference effect and the learning of motor skills.
1990) Effects of contextual interference on retention of three volleyball skills.
1986) Contextual interference effects in learning three badminton serves.