A stitch in time saves nine! Thanks to @drcrmatthews.bsky.social for the gift as I prepare to dive into the deep end with my PhD.

“The unexamined life isn’t worth living.”

Finally, their practical applications are spot on. Coaches tailor their sessions to what athletes need. Sometimes a more exploratory (NLP) approach is needed, sometimes a more exploitative (LP) approach is needed.

Rather than a dichotomy (LP v NLP), is a continuum (LP <-> NLP) better?

Results interesting. For LP, there is improvement from pre-post, and (very slight improvement) pre-ret. Depending on the paradigm, you could draw different conclusions.

One way to look at it, both interventions led to improvements, so the question becomes when and where would you use LP vs NLP?

There have been a number of mentions of Giacobbi et al (2005), which mentions Dewey, Pierce, James and Rory.

There are many references to Schon and Giacobbi, which reference original pragmatists. Is it fair to say that these authors (and others) are “crude” pragmatists? (If that’s your point?)

There is room for mental processes in pragmatism, as seen by the role of reflective inquiry within it. Unless I have missed your point?

And Dewey’s writings support pragmatism as an organising framework for the practitioner (see image)

This is all great food for thought. I am not fully sure what you are implying (I am at the limits of my own intellectual capacity right now). And I definitely cannot speak for the authors.

But pragmatism is a valid framework for professional practice (see image).

This is probably a key point of difference because I hear that a lot and I disagree. Theories are tools for coaches to help make sense of the world.
Given that there is only weak evidence for everything at this point, how can one make a commitment to anything? (Genuine question)

Is quantitative research the best tool to use when trying to understand coaching? Does it truly capture the complexity of coaching?

*Important to note I’m not trying to conflate quantitative research and positivist research - probably a separate discussion!

A few basketball training tasks. Dodgy camerawork, and only 3 players, but still an opportunity to challenge player decision making.