Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829

ERPA 2014

Τhe effect of variable and stable practice on performance and

learning the header skill of young athletes in soccer
Eleni Zetoua*, Leonidas Papadakisa, NikolaosVernadakisa, Vassiliki Derria,
Evangelos Bebetsosa, Filippos Filippoua
a
Dept. of Phy. Education & Sport Science, Democritus University of Thrace, Komotini, 69100, Hellas

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of variable practice in learning the header skill in soccer. Thirty nine
young athletes aged 10-12 (M=11.6, SD=0.55) with a training experience of 2 years (M=1.75, SD=0.25) were randomly divided
in two groups. The first experimental group (VPG, n=20) followed a training program planned and organized by variable method
of practice while the second experimental group (SPG, n=19) followed a stable/constant practice method. Both methods aimed at
learning of the header skill. The duration of the intervention was eight (8) weeks; three (3) times per week, for 20 min.
Participants of both groups were measured before the intervention (pre-test), after eight weeks of intervention (post-test) and one
week after the final test without having any practice at all of header skill (retention test). For the header skill evaluation the test of
i-Soccer (http://www.playisoccer.com/header) was used. ANOVA repeated measures indicated that there was an interaction
effect between measures and group. Analyzing the interaction for the repeated factor “measure”, a significant effect for variable
group but not for stable group in the header skill was revealed. The athletes of variable group benefited from variable practice
and they shaped the motor schema of header skill. In conclusion, coaches and physical education teachers could use variable
practice in the long term development of soccer’s header skill, if they have as a goal for their athletes to perform the skill in game
situations.
© 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
© 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
Keywords: variable practice, stable practice, soccer, performance, learning

*
Corresponding author. Address: Polytehneiou 8A, 69100 Komotini, Greece.
E-mail address: elzet@phyed.duth.gr

1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.328
 Eleni Zetou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829 825

1. Introduction

In the study of learning and memory practice variability relates to the use of a training program that includes
changes during the execution of efforts, the parameters of a generalized motor program (Schmidt, 1975). According
to the schema theory, the generalized motor program may be performed in various ways and give different response
results. So there is no need to run every movement a different motor program to be performed. To achieve the
different effects of movements, specific program parameters should be defined (eg, power, speed). The change of the
task’s parameters is referred as variability of practice (Shapiro & Schmidt, 1982). Literature has emphasized the
importance of introducing variability during exercise, so that people do not rely on a particular set of answers that
will ultimately reduce their chances, for transfer and generalization of learning skills (Kadzin 1975; Shute &
Gawlick, 1995).
Several researchers have tried to find the ideal way to practice when learning skills with many times conflicting
or ambiguous results. In a research of Hunter (1977) using a ballistic test, group with high variability yielded
significantly fewer absolute errors than the constant group. In another research, Johnson and McCabe (1982) also
using a ballistic test, found that the variable practice group yielded no less absolute errors relative to the constant
group, so the investigation did not provide support for the schema theory. However, the effect of practice variability
on an open skill was found positive by Wrisberg and Ragsdale (1979). Specifically, variability group performed the
test criterion with significantly fewer errors than the constant practice group, supporting the positive impact of
variability on open skills. Elfaqir (1982) in his research with two groups of adults (variable and constant), a task
precision throwing ball, and execution of 1000 efforts found no significant differences in transfer and retention
measures between groups. The research with a targeting task of Pigott and Shapiro (1984) in children, pointed
constant practice such beneficial as random-variable or constant-variable, while Shea and Kohl (1990) showed that
practicing with variations on a parameter (absolute power) of a test, outbalanced constant practice and created
another controversy and difficulty in finding the virtual training method for learning skills. Williams (1998) in his
article on the usefulness of variable training in soccer argued that practice variability increases generalization of a
skill and is an important parameter in motor learning. Williams and Hodges (2005) in their study supported the
positive effect of variability as a breakthrough in modern coaching process. Yao et al. (2009) wanted to investigate
whether the results of discrete skills would be the same in a continuous motor skill, inherent to the real daily life
such as promoting wheelchair. The results had a mixed character as variable practice group produced less absolute
errors of only one of the two groups of constant practice for both tests of skill transfer. In comparison to the second
group of constant practice, variable practice produced less absolute errors in only one of the two transfer tasks. The
results of Yao et al. (2012) in a new research confirmed the results of previous researches for the variability in
practice where again in a skill of promotion of a wheelchair variable practice outweighed constant practice.
Interestingly, the approach of Zipp and Gentile (2010) for learning skills that require movement of the whole body,
where the variability in practice was less beneficial to children and beginners, as for the writers, the learner is invited
to discover the proper way of execution and to cope with the complexity of motor control in parts of his/her body. In
an effort to revive earlier experiments with children, Van den Tillaar and Marques (2013) compared the effect of
practice on ballistic test with constant and varying weights. The results provided no support for the theory of schema
as the two teams equally improved performance from practicing. The research of Hernandez et al. (2014) on the
tennis serve showed that the variability of practice was the best way to improve a specific skill, adding another
modern research that supports the theory of practice variability.
In the literature there are many factors that play a role in the process of experimentation. The age of individuals
who participate in the research (Shapiro & Schmidt 1982; Lee et al. 1985), the level of experience of individuals
(Del Rey et al. 1982), the choice of the transfer task (eg. inside or outside the width of skill; Lee et al. 1985), the
series that variability presented (Elfaqir 1982; Newell & Shapiro 1976), the kind of skill (open or closed skill; Barto,
1986), and the sex of the individuals involved (Elfaqir, 1982). None of these factors has been investigated so well to
draw firm conclusions. Given the above review of research and the need for further investigation of the effectiveness
of training methods, research shows interest in comparing relevant coaching intervention protocols. For these
reasons the aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of variable and constant practice on the
performance and learning of the header skill by young novice athletes in soccer. The studied hypothesis was that
variable practice should be better than stable practice in performance and learning the header skill in real situation.
826 Eleni Zetou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Thirty nine (39) young male athletes aged of 10-12 (M=11.6, SD=0.55) with a training experience of two years
(M=1.75, SD=0.25) were randomly divided in two groups. The athletes participated in the experiment after having
obtained written permission from their parents.

2.2. Intervention procedure

The first experimental group (VPG, n=20) followed a training program planned and organized by variable method
of practice while the second experimental group (SPG, n=19) followed a stable/constant practice method for header
skill learning. The duration of the intervention was eight (8) weeks, three (3) times per week (24 total practices). The
practice time was 80 min, but only 20 min athletes practiced the header skill and took place in a local soccer court.
At the beginning of each practice, both groups were given the same instructions for the skill. The training session
consisted of warm up, drills for practicing the technique of header skill (and other skills) games in small courts and
warm down. The athletes of Variable practice were practicing the header skill, using in each drill one parameter for
ten repetitions (eg. distance=near, far; height=high, low; etc.), and then they changed this parameter for the next ten
repetitions, then they practiced again ten repetitions of the first drill and so on. The athletes of stable/constant
practice were practicing the header skill, using in each drill only one parameter for ten repetitions in three sets.
Practice was conducted individually with a ball, or in pairs. In each practice session two different parameters were
practiced. The main purpose of this practice plan was to enable athletes to practice in high level of variability, such
as the game situations inflict. The athletes were provided feedback (knowledge of performance and knowledge of
results) by the coach, every time he/she considered it necessary.

2.3. Evaluation of header skill

Participants of both groups were measured before the intervention (pre-test), after eight weeks of intervention
(post-test) and one week after the final test without having any practice at all of header skill (retention test). For the
header skill evaluation the test of i-Soccer, (http://www.playisoccer.com/header) was used (Figures1 and 2).

2.4. Evaluation procedure

Before being tested in the header skill, participants followed a general and special warm up program for 15 min.
They were also provided with information about the header test. Each participant should keep the ball in the air for
20 seconds, using his head and remaining in the marked area (a quarter 5X5) (Figure 2). Each touch was count one
point. If the ball touched the body no point was recorded.

5m player

5m
Figure 1. The test of header Figure 2. The test of header
 Eleni Zetou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829 827

2.5. Equipment

Concerning the equipment for the implementation of the program, 12 balls, 26 cones, lines, goal posts and a timer
were used.

2.9. Research design and statistical analysis

The reliability test – retest and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used for checking header test (Shrout &
Fleiss, 1979). The research design of the study was factorial in the form of (2Χ3). There were two independent
variables: a) group, (experimental group 1, variable practice group and the experimental group 2, stable/constant
practice group), and b) measurement (pre, post and retention test). The dependent variables were the athletes’
performance on the header skill test. T-test analysis for Independent samples was used for the evaluation of initial
performance. The statistical analysis of the data was made using the program SPSS 17. Significance was determined
at the .05 level. Prior to the Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance, a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (K-S test) on the
normality of the variables and a Box’s M test of equality of covariance matrices were carried out. There was a non-
significant value (p<.05), which indicated that data did not differ significantly from the multivariate normality of
variables, thus parametric tests could be applied.

3. Results

3.1. Test-retest reliability of header test

Test – retest shows high reliability: 4.27±1.33 in first test and 4.20±1.26 in retest (ICC=0.91, SE=0.42).

3.2. Initial measurements

T-test analysis for Independent samples revealed that there were no significant differences in header skill
performance between the groups for the baseline measurement (p=0.213), which means that athletes started from the
same level of learning.

3.3. The effect of the program on the athletes’ performance and learning the header skill

Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA repeated measures, 2 groups Χ 3 measurements), was applied
to test for differences within and between the two groups among the three measurements of the header skill. Results
showed that there was significant interaction between group and measurement (F(2.74)=4.01, p<.05, η2=.098,),
significant main effect of the measurement (F(2.74)=11.57, p<.05, η2=.238,) but not main effect of group (F(1.37)=.644,
p=.427. η2=.017,), which can be interpreted that the athletes of variable practice had significant differences on the
three measurements of the header skill. However, the variable practice group had a higher performance than the
stable practice group in both final and retention measurements. The findings are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. The athletes score on header skill in the three measurements.

1st measurement 2nd measurement 3rd measurement
Groups N M SD M SD M SD
Variable practice 20 4 1.52 5.10 1.68 4.85 1.46
Stable practice 19 4.10 1.66 4.42 1.77 4.26 1.48
Total 39 4.05 1.57 4.76 1.73 4.56 1.48

3. Discussion

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of variable practice on performance and learning of the
header skill by young novice athletes in soccer. The results indicated that participants of both groups were improved.
828 Eleni Zetou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829

However, the participants of variable practice group had significantly higher performance than the stable practice
group in both final and retention measurement.
The findings of this study come to disagreement with those of Zelaznik (1977), Elfaqir (1982), Pigott and Shapiro
(1984), Wrisberg and Mead (1983), Goode and Magill (1986), Zetou et al. (2007), Tilaar and Marques (2013), Kerr
and Booth (1978), Wrisberg and Ragsdale (1979), Yao et al. (2012). On the other hand, Hunter (1977), Kelso and
Norman (1978), Lee et al. (1985), Hall et al. (1994), Whitehurst (1981), Berslin et al. (2012) agree by supporting the
superiority of variability in practice. Several studies also led to mixed results (reviewed by Van Rossum 1990; Yao
et al. 2009; Tsutsui, Lee & Hodges 1998). Williams (1998) examining the usefulness of variable practice in soccer,
argued that practice variability increases generalization of a skill and is an important parameter in motor learning.
Furthermore Williams and Hodges (2005) supported the positive effect of variability as a breakthrough in modern
coaching process. Another recent study that supported the theory of practice variability was Hernandez et al. (2014).
They examined the learning of service skill in tennis and showed that the variability of practice was the best way for
participants to improve the service skill.
A possible explanation for this -based on the schema theory- study might be that the participants benefited from
variable practice because they had almost developed the motor schema of the skill. Another explanation might
concern about the nature of the sport, because athletes’ experienced in the implementation of the skills and in
training time where varied. In conclusion, it is suggested that soccer coaches or even physical education teachers
should carry out both practice methods while training athletes to learn the skills efficiency. More specifically, when
coaches have novice athletes they can use stable practice while when they have athletes that have formed the motor
schema of the skill they should use variable practice. Future research could investigate the effect of variable practice
on learning of athletes of different age and experience, and in real game situations.

4. References

Barto, J. L. (1986). Variable practice effects on recall schema development for an open and closed motor skill. Unpublished thesis (Ph.D.),
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Breslin, G. Hodges, N., Steenson, A., & Williams, A. M. (2012). Constand or Variable Practice:Recreating the especial skill effect. Acta
Psychologia, 140, 154-157.
Del Rey, P., E.H. Wughalter & M. Whitehurst (1982). The effects of contextual interference on females with varied experience in open sport
skills. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 53, 108-115.
Elfaqir, F. (1982). Effet de la specificit et de la variabilite de la pratique sur l’apprentissage dun geste global [The effect of specificity and
variability of practice on the acquisition of a gross motor skill]. Unpublished thesis (MSC. Physical Education), University of Montreal,
Montreal, Canada.
Hall, K. G, Domingues , D. A, & Cavazos, R. (1994). Contextual interference effects with skilled baseball players. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
78, 835.
Hernández-Davo, H., Urbán, T., Sarabia, J. M., Juan-Recio, C., & Moreno, F. J. (2014). Variable training: effects on velocity and accuracy in the
tennis serve. Journal of Sports Sciences, 7. [Epub ahead of print].
Hunter, M. D. (1977). Unpublished experiments. University of Southern California Jarus, T., & Goverover, Y. (1999). Effects of contextual
interference and age on acquisition, retention, and transfer of motor skill. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 437-447.
Johnson, R. W., & McCabe, J. F. (1982). Schema theory - A test of the hypothesis, variation in practice. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 231-
234.
Kazdin, A. E. (1975). Behavior Modification in Applied Settings. Dorsey Press (Homewood, I11).
Kelso, J. A. S., & Norman, P. E. (1978). Motor schema formation in children. Developmental Psychology, 14, 153-156.
Lee, T. D., Magill, R. A., & Weeks, D. J. (1985). Influence of Practice Schedule on Testing Schema Theory Predictions in Adults. Journal of
Motor Behavior, 17, 283 – 299.
Newell, K. M. & Shapiro, D. C. (1976). Variability of practice and transfer of training – Some evidence toward a schema view of motor learning.
Journal of Motor Behavior, 8, 233-243.
Pigott, R. E. & Shapiro, D. C. (1984). Motor schema: The structure of the variability session. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 55, 41-
45.
Shapiro, D. C. & R. A. Schmidt, (1982). ‘The schema theory: Recent evidence and developmental implications’. In: J.A.S. KeIso and J.E. Clark
(eds.), The development of movement control and co-ordination. New York: Wiley. pp. 113-150.
Shea, C. H., & Kohl, R. M. (1990). Specificity and variability of practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61, 169-177.
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A Schema Theory of Discrete Motor Skill Learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225 – 260.
Shute, V. J. & Gawlick, L. A. (1995). Practice effects on skill acquisition, learning outcome, retention, and sensitivity to relearning. Human
Factors, 37, 781-803.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.
 Eleni Zetou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 824 – 829 829

Tsutsui, S., Lee, T., & Hodges, N. (1998). Contextual interference in learning new patterns of bimanual coordination. Journal of Motor Behavior,
30 (2), 151-157.
Van Rossum, J. (1990). Schmidt's schema theory: the empirical base of the variability of practice hypothesis: A critical analysis. Human
Movement Science, 9 (3-5), 387-435.
Van den Tillaar R. & Marques C. M. (2013). Effect of specific versus variable practice upon overhead throwing speed in children. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 116(3), 872-884.
Whitehurst, M. (1981). The effects of task difficulty, contextual interference and levels of processing on acquisition, retention and transfer of an
open motor skill. Unpublished thesis (Doctor of Education), University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Williams A. M. & Hodges N. J. (2005). Practice Instruction and Skill Acquisition in Soccer: Challenging Tradition, Journal of Sports Science.
Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(6), 637-650.
Williams, A.M. (1998). Anticipation in football. Insight, The FA Coaches Association Journal, 1(3), 17±21.
Wrisberg. C. A., & Ragsdale, M. R. (1979). Further tests of Schmidt's schema theory: Development of a schema rule for a coincident timing task.
Journal of Motor Behavior, 11, 159- 166.
Yao, W. X., DeSola, W., & Bi, Z. C. (2009). Variable Practice Versus Constant Practice in the Acquisition of Wheelchair Propulsive Speeds.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109, 1-7.
Yao, W. X., Cordova, A., De Sola, W., Hart, C., & Yan, A. F. (2012). The effect of variable practice on wheelchair propulsive efficiency and
propulsive timing. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 48(2):209-216.
Zelaznik. H. N. (1977). Transfer in rapid timing tasks; An examinalion of the role of variability in practice, in D. M. Landers and R. W. Christina
(eds.). Psychology of Motor Behavior and Sport (Vol 1), Champaign, III.: Human Kinetics (36-43).
Zipp P. G. & Gentile A. M (2010). Practice Schedule and the Learning of Motor Skills in Children and Adults: Teaching Implications Journal of
College Teaching & Learning 7(2), 35-42.
http://www.playisoccer.com/header