With sport coaches adopting and working toward increasingly evidence-grounded approaches to practice, skill acquisition has appropriately become a critical area for consideration. As part of this growing interest in skill acquisition, the ecological dynamics approach has garnered attention amongst scholars and practitioners with myriad media (e.g. peer-reviewed articles, books, podcasts and social-media outputs) extolling its benefits. In doing this, however, the available guidance, advice and scholarship have typically positioned ecological dynamics as a direct competitor to existing or traditional cognitive approaches, advising against practical integration of approaches due to theoretical incompatibility. As a standalone approach, we are concerned that there are mechanistic and epistemological issues and inconsistencies that prevent experimental comparisons and limit its applicability, novelty and capability to comprehensively address real-world athlete and coach needs. Based on this, in this Current Opinion paper, we lay out these concerns and critically examine the clarity, coherence and consistency of the approach and its associated literature. In concluding, we also suggest that a more evidence-based and mechanistically driven approach that draws upon a wider set of theoretical perspectives can offer greater benefit to athletes, coaches and practitioners in real-world sport.

随着体育教练采用并努力实现越来越以证据为基础的实践方法，技能获取已成为一个值得考虑的关键领域。作为人们对技能获取日益增长的兴趣的一部分，生态动力学方法已经引起了学者和从业者的关注，无数媒体（例如同行评审的文章、书籍、播客和社交媒体输出）都赞扬了它的好处。然而，在这样做的过程中，可用的指导、建议和学术研究通常将生态动力学定位为现有或传统认知方法的直接竞争对手，由于理论上的不相容性，建议不要对方法进行实际整合。作为一种独立的方法，我们担心存在机制和认识论问题和不一致之处，这些问题会阻止实验比较并限制其适用性、新颖性和全面解决现实世界运动员和教练需求的能力。基于此，在这篇 Current Opinion 论文中，我们列出了这些担忧，并批判性地研究了该方法及其相关文献的清晰度、连贯性和一致性。总之，我们还建议，一种更加基于证据和机械驱动的方法，利用更广泛的理论观点，可以为现实世界运动中的运动员、教练和从业者带来更大的好处。