Adaptation to physically and
emotionally demanding conditions: the
role of deliberate practice
Michael B. Johnson*a, Gershon Tenenbaumb andWilliam A. Edmondsc
aUniversity of Texas-Pan American; bFlorida State University; cNova Southeastern University
The current study elucidated the reasons for athletic performance differences between individuals
who (1) engage in similar workloads, and (2) develop in similar environments. 8 elite and 11 sub-
elite swimmers, with confirming data provided by 17 of their parents and 6 of their coaches,
participated in this investigation. Findings revealed that (1) a variety of different practice regimens
can result in attaining expertise, and (2) highly analogous developmental experiences may not
differentiate between elite and sub-elite performers. Results provide support for a 4-factor model
of expert athletic development: high effort, supportive environment, facilitative coping strategies,
and physical and psychological predispositions. Each is likely required to achieve elite athletic
performance, and all must be present in such a manner that they are systematically and
idiosyncratically functional.
Keywords: Expertise, Talent, Nature, Nurture, Swimming
The extensive scientific work of Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Romer (1993) on
attaining and sustaining elite performance has resulted in several principles
collectively termed ‘deliberate practice.’ Deliberate practice refers to training
activities designed to enhance an individual’s performance, with explicitly defined
parameters including (1) a well-defined task with appropriate difficulty level, (2)
high effort, and (3) opportunities for repetition and error correction. Furthermore,
deliberate practice is designed to optimize the performer’s training regimen, and is
not inherently enjoyable due to its rigorous nature. Support for the principles of
deliberate practice within the motor domain was found in studies involving soccer
players (Helsen et al., 1998), wrestlers (Starkes et al., 1996), and middle-distance
runners (Young, 1998). The aim of the current study is to test the principles of
deliberate practice by sampling two groups of swimmers, one that attained world
recognition and the other that did not, while members of both groups trained under
*Corresponding author. UTPA, 1201 W. University Ave., Department of Educational Psychology,
College of Education, EDCC 1.650, Edinburg, TX 78541. Email: [email protected]
High Ability Studies
Vol. 17, No. 1, June 2006, pp. 117–136
ISSN 1359-8139 (print)/ISSN 1469-834X (online)/06/010117-20
# 2006 European Council for High Ability
DOI: 10.1080/13598130600947184
the same conditions. Contrasting the practice regimens and developmental
experiences of elite and sub-elite swimmers who trained under similar environmental
conditions permitted the elucidation of the crucial requisites and prerequisites
needed to reach elite performance levels. This is a more sound methodology than
previous empirical expert–novice contrasts where performers differed markedly in
many developmental and training aspects.
Ericsson et al. (1993) articulated a distinction between repetitive training and
deliberate practice, i.e., experience alone was not a good predictor of performance
level. Only when people face failures of their entrenched procedures do they actively
engage in learning and modification of their skills (Ericsson, 1998a), which is a main
feature of learning emphasized earlier by Bloom (1985). The need for concentration
is an important concept due to its differentiation from both mindless drilling and
playful engagement. In a study involving two expert athletes, Thomas and Thomas
(1999) provided support for this notion by interviewing two elementary school
physical education teachers who taught athletes that later became experts in their
respective sports. The teachers identified (1) hard work (i.e., practice), (2) knowing
what to do (i.e., knowledge), (3) demonstrating a positive attitude (i.e.,
attributions), and (4) coordinating skill execution as the most important factors
related to their former students’ athletic development. Research with soccer players
(Helsen et al., 2000) and ice skaters (Deakin & Cobley, 2003) provided additional
lines of evidence for the concept of purposeful ‘quality over quantity’ practice as a
salient factor in elite athletic development.
Given this empirical support for the tenets undergirding deliberate practice it is
also important to recognize some potential weaknesses. One area of investigation
that may strengthen deliberate practice lies in an exploration of the three limitations
to the amount of deliberate practice one may engage in, i.e., (1) resource constraints
(e.g., adequate time, energy, coaches, and facilities), (2) motivational constraints
(i.e., the fact that deliberate practice is not inherently enjoyable), and (3) effort
constraints, also known as learned industriousness (Eisenberger, 1998). Since all
human beings differ to some degree (e.g., resources, motivation, height, gender,
bone structure, and eyesight), there are differences among people in these three
factors that may require individuals to vary the amount of deliberate practice each of
them requires to achieve similar levels of performance.
Deliberate practice implies that nurture accounts for almost all of the variability in
the development of expert performances. However, there is evidence that supports
the existence of a salient factor in addition to nurture. Two empirical studies, when
considered together, provide support for this notion in athletics. In the first, Ericsson
and Lehman (1996) contended that basic human physiological adaptations in
response to repeated bouts of deliberate practice permit further extended intense
practice, thereby suggesting an additional factor involved in deliberate practice
beyond what is currently considered, i.e., deliberate practice factors may interact
with the expression of one’s genetic potentials to result in a particular performance
level. In the second study cited here, Pelliccia (1996) found that endurance sports
lead to a physiological enlargement of the heart, and to an increase in the heart wall’s
118 M. B. Johnson et al.
thickness, depending on the endurance sport, and on the intensity and extent of
training. However, Pelliccia argued that this adaptation might be influenced by
several factors including anthropometric parameters, gender, and genetic disposi-
tions. Furthermore, Gualdi-Russo and Graziani (1993) showed that different
somatotypes correlate with performance level in some sport domains, i.e., high
performers in ballgames and martial arts possess a greater tendency toward a
mesomorphic body type, while high performers in sports such as swimming tend to
be more endomorphic.
Theories of evolutionary adaptation, such as Darwin’s (1859/1964), also
contribute to questions regarding the validity of deliberate practice as it pertains
to athletic contexts. Evolution supports the premise that organisms appropriately
adapt to the environment, or they cease to exist. Organisms that get too far ahead, or
fall too far behind the requirements needed to survive fail to endure. Additionally,
organisms adapt at varying rates, and therefore differ in their inherited psychological
and physiological capabilities to assimilate similar cognitive, affective, or behavioral
workloads.
The current study aimed at investigating the possibility that a person begins life
with certain intellectual, affective, and physical potentials (i.e., talent) that are
actualized to varying degrees via environmental influences (i.e., nurture). Figure 1
presents a modified version of Tenenbaum’s (1999) model, which illustrates the
relationships among the factors involved in the development of athletic performance.
Figure 1. A model depicting the relationship between nature and nurture in the development of
expertise in sport. (Adapted from Tenenbaum, 1999, p. 114)
Talent and expert sport development 119
An individual’s genetic endowment impacts their entry factors, such as motor and
physical skills, cognitions, perceptions, self-efficacy, affect, and coping strategies.
These are expressed during practice, and are developed as a function of the idio-
syncratic appropriateness of the athlete’s practice/instruction experiences. The con-
tinuous and consistent engagement in deliberate practice secures further enhance-
ment of the athlete’s motor, cognitive, and affective skills. This developmental
model is consistent with Rose’s (1995) contention whereby lifetime behavioral
choices are guided by a person’s dispositional tendencies, and these tendencies find
expression within environmental opportunities that are actively created.
There are also two influential works that investigated the developmental stages of
highly accomplished athletes. Both proposed three stages of elite athletic
development. In the first, Bloom (1985) identified three stages of talent
development: (1) The early years (i.e., initiation, up to age 10 years), (2) the
middle years (i.e., development, ages 10–14 years), and (3) the late years (i.e.,
perfection, ages 14 and above). In the second, Cote (1999) proposed three distinct
stages of sport participation: (1) sampling, (2) specializing, and (3) investment
stages; which were very similar to those identified in Bloom’s earlier work. By
uncovering the developmental experiences of a number of elite and sub-elite
athletes, rather than solely analyzing the progress of elite performers as was done in
these empirical works, the current study illuminates developmental similarities and
differences among those of two different performance levels while controlling for
environmental factors to a greater degree.
The current study continues to expand upon and investigate the relationship
between deliberate practice and the developmental stages of athletic expertise based
on a modified version of Tenenbaum’s (1999) model (see Figure 1). It appears likely
that a diligent application of oneself for a prerequisite amount of deliberate practice
does not necessarily lead to athletic expertise. Based on previous research, it appears
plausible that a person’s idiosyncratic characteristics dictate the need for a unique
and multidimensional approach to maximizing their athletic development.
Deliberate practice may be a necessary condition for achieving expert athletic
performance, but it may not be sufficient. In order to diligently investigate this
possibility, the current study utilized participants from a sport that permits an
objective evaluation of an individual’s workload and their performance. If the
practice regimens and developmental experiences of an elite swimmer can be
recorded, and if these can be shown to mirror the experiences and workloads of
another swimmer who did not achieve elite performances, then further investigations
into the possible causes for this must involve factors in addition to those found in the
principles of deliberate practice.
Method
Participants
To examine the cause and effect relationship between environmental factors and
performance level posited by previous research on expert athletic development
120 M. B. Johnson et al.
(Cote, 1999; Ericsson, 1998a, 2001; Ericsson et al., 1993; Ericsson & Lehman,
1996) we interviewed 19 competitive swimmers, a parent of each (n517), and their
coach (n56). There were 41 total participants as one swimmer’s coach is also her
father. Expert performers in this study were defined as people who consistently
demonstrated a very high performance level relative to the general population, and
relative to other swimmers in this particular domain (Ericsson, 1998a, 1998b;
Ericsson et al., 1993). This distinction was made because research has shown that
experts in many fields, e.g., psychotherapy (Dawes, 1994) and the stock-market
(Stael von Holstein, 1972), perform as well as non-experts.
Elite swimmers (n58) in this study had achieved at least one gold medal at an
Olympic Games or World Championships, were ranked in the top 5 in the world at
the conclusion of a calendar year, or, in one case, was the top ranked 13 year old in
the world in her primary event. Sub-elite swimmers (n511) in this study had not
achieved these criteria, yet had qualified for at least one U.S. National
Championship or, in the case of the youths involved in this study, had achieved a
top 5 national ranking in the U.S.A. for their age-group. One exception was made as
an individual was included in the sub-elite group who had never qualified for a
national championship, yet he was identified as one of the better swimmers on his
NCAA Division I university swimming team. This study’s sub-elite swimmers would
be considered experts in many places around the world. These 19 swimmers were
culled from 6 different programs around the United States. Each of these programs
was included because they allowed multiple athletes to take part in this study, and
enabled to control for the potentially mediating environmental variable of coaching.
Instrumentation
Athlete interviews elicited a retrospective picture of the quantifiable developmental
experiences of each swimmer. Parents’ and coaches’ views, comments, thoughts,
perspectives, and recollections about the swimmers’ developmental, workout, and
competitive history and environments were used to triangulate and confirm
information obtained during interviews with the athletes to improve the validity of
this study (Patton, 2002). All participants were asked the same questions from this
study’s interview guide protocol. The goal of this study’s interview instrument was to
elicit an accurate picture of the swimmer’s developmental process and environ-
mental experiences.
The interview guide used in this study was adapted from Cote’s (1999) and
Bloom’s (1985) earlier work. The ability of such a recall, talk-aloud interview
process to elicit verifiable information regarding an athlete’s skill development, and
the factors that might influence their achievement level, has support in the literature
(Cote et al., 2005). Each participant was asked open-ended questions concerning a
number of areas of their developmental experiences including the annual number of
hours they spent (1) training in swimming each year, e.g., ‘How many hours did you
spend in swim training each week and for how many weeks each year?’ (2) training in
non-swimming activities specifically designed to positively impact their swimming
Talent and expert sport development 121
performance, e.g., ‘How many hours did you spend in non-swimming training each
week specifically designed to improve your swimming performance, and for how
many weeks each year?’ and (3) training in non-swimming activities that were
unrelated to swimming performance, e.g., ‘How many hours did you spend in non-
swimming training each week that was not specifically designed to improve your
swimming performance, and for how many weeks each year?’ Additionally, each
swimmer was asked to share the level of effort and concentration they engaged in
each year for each activity. Coaches and parents were also asked for their perceptions
regarding the swimmers’ level of effort and concentration. Activities in this final
domain could include sports (e.g., soccer), arts (e.g., musical instruments), or
sedentary/diversionary activities (e.g., watching TV or playing video games). Each
interview lasted from 50 to 105 minutes.
Procedure
Interviews were conducted with all 41 participants. Coding for each swimmer was
created in to denote their elite or sub-elite status, i.e., elite swimmers ‘E,’ sub-elite
‘S.’ Each swimmer was also assigned a number between 1 and 6, which
corresponded to their program’s training site. Training sites with more than one
elite and/or sub-elite swimmer also included ‘a,’ ‘b,’ or ‘c,’ to differentiate among
multiple elite or sub-elite athletes from a single training site.
The interview process included open-ended questions to aide participants’
recollection of past experiences in order to avoid relying on participants’ memories
of a specific event (Seidman, 1991). An interview guide suggested by Patton (2002)
was used in order to ensure that the same lines of inquiry were pursued with each
person interviewed. Verbatim-transcribed interviews were forwarded to the
respective participant for their review within a month of their interview. The
participant’s approval regarding accuracy of content was requested and received.
The depth and authenticity of the participants’ responses were assured via the
interview techniques used. Three types of questions were used in order to assure
depth of participant responses: (1) main questions, (2) probe questions, and (3)
follow-up questions (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Main questions constituted the
interview script and guided the interview process. Probe questions clarified
responses, while follow-up questions investigated new issues that arose during the
interview process (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Responses were valuable sources of
information regarding swimmers’ thought processes, affective responses, and
behavioral patterns.
Data Analysis
The interview data was systematically analyzed for content. Each swimmer’s sport,
artistic, scholastic, and sedentary activities were recorded, as were the ages at which
each person participated in that activity. Additionally, the hours spent practicing
each activity, and each swimmer’s achievement milestones, were also recorded. The
122 M. B. Johnson et al.
hours of practice that each swimmer self-reported was triangulated with reports from
their coach, and one of their parents. Each participant was interviewed individually.
Generally accepted quantitative methods were used in the current study in order to
accomplish the inductive goals of this study and are reported in the results section.
Results
The data consists of (1) the swimmers’ achievements, (2) the age at which these
achievements were accomplished, (3) the activities each swimmer was involved in
during their development, and (4) the amount of time each swimmer spent
deliberately practicing in each of these activities.
Table 1 itemizes the highest achievements of this study’s adult swimmers. Each of
the elite athletes reached the highest level in the sport of swimming for multiple
years. Additionally, the accomplishments of the sub-elite swimmers are indicative of
high-level performance; however, these athletes are easily differentiated from the
elite swimmers on objective performance.
Achievement milestones for every elite and sub-elite swimmer are shown in
Table 2. Each individual had a unique age at which they (1) became involved in
competitive swimming, (2) achieved state, national, and international standards of
performance, (3) made the decision to be an elite swimmer, and (4) began non-
swimming activities designed to improve their swimming performance.
Table 1. Athletic outcomes attained by elite (E) and sub-elite (S) swimmers in this study
Swimmer # Accomplishments
E1 3 Olympic gold medals (1996, 2000); 3rd all-time performer in 2 events
E2 #1 ranked 13 year old in the world in an event in 2004
E3a 1 Olympic gold medal (2000); USA National Team member for 2 years
E3b #4 in the world in 2 events in 2003; Current American record holder
E4 1 Olympic gold medal (2004); Current American record holder
E5 1 Olympic gold medal (2004); Current world record holder in 3 events
E6a #1 in the world in late 1990s; USA National Team member for 7 years
E6b 1 Olympic gold medal (2000); Current world record holder in 2 events
S1 USA Olympic Trials qualifier; NCAA Division I Championships qualifier
S2a Top 10 in the USA for her age when 10 years old
S2b Top 10 in the USA for her current age-group, i.e., 12 years of age
S2c USA Junior National champion; NCAA Division I scholarship athlete
S3 NCAA Division I athlete
S4a Olympic Trials qualifier; NCAA Division I Championships qualifier
S4b USA National Championship rookie of the meet; NCAA Division I
Championships qualifier
S5 NCAA Division I athlete
S6a NCAA Championships qualifier
S6b NCAA Championships qualifier
S6c NCAA Championships qualifier; 4th at British National Championships
Talent and expert sport development 123
Table 3 provides a list of the (1) non-swimming activities each athlete engaged in
specifically to enhance their swimming performance, and (2) non-swimming
activities each athlete participated that were unrelated to their swimming
performance. Only one swimmer, S2c, lacked non-swimming sport experience.
The remaining 18 reported a wide range of involvement in non-swimming activities.
The swimmers also provided information regarding their annual training volume.
Table 4 represents the cumulative number of hours each swimmer spent in (1) swim
training designed specifically to enhance swimming performance, and (2) training in
all athletic activities, up to the time of their first significant international competitive
achievement. Age at the time of that achievement was also noted. The average age
for the 7 elite swimmers in Table 4 was 19.3 years and their mean accumulated
hours of deliberate practice in Table 4 was 7,129 hours of swimming and 8,898
hours in all activities. The mean hours that the sub-elite swimmers spent engaged in
swimming specific activities prior to their most significant achievement was 7,819,
Table 2. Swimming achievement milestones of each swimmer
Swimmer #(and gender)
Age at which the swimmer:
Began
competitive
swimming
Achieved
state, national,
international
performance
Decided to be
an elite swimmer
Non-swimming
activities to
improve swimming
E1 (f) 5 7, 12, 14 12 17
E2 (f) 7 12, 13, N/A Has not yet
(currently
14 years of
age)
12
E3a (f) 8 12, 15, 17 17 15
E3b (f) 6 12, 13, 17 12 16
E4 (m) 7 15, 16, 20 16 13
E5 (m) 8 15, 20, 23 19 14
E6a (m) 15 18, 19, 22 18 14
E6b (m) 16 16, 18, 19 16 16
S1 (f) 11 11, 15, N/A Did not 15
S2a (f) 5 15, N/A, N/A Has not yet
(currently 16)
15
S2b (f) 7 12, N/A, N/A Has not yet
(currently 13)
N/A
S2c (f) 4 13, 16, N/A Did not N/A
S3 (m) 12 N/A, N/A, N/A Did not 14
S4a (m) 6 14, 16, N/A 16 13
S4b (m) 9 16, 18, N/A 19 13
S5 (m) 7 16, 20, N/A Did not 14
S6a (m) 7 14, 17, N/A 17 15
6b (m) 7 15, 17, N/A 17 15
S6c (f) 8 15, 17, N/A 17 18
124 M. B. Johnson et al.
while this group’s average for all activities was 9,196 hours. The average age of the 9
sub-elites swimmers in Table 4 was 20.3 years.
A comparison between the means of the two groups’ ages in Table 4 reveals little
difference, i.e., the sub-elite group was 1.0 years older than the elite group. Prior to
highest accomplishments, sub-elite swimmers spent on average 690 hours more (i.e.,
9.7%) more than elite group deliberately practicing swimming. Moreover, the sub-
elite swimmers spent, on average, 298 hours (i.e., 3.3%) more than their elite
counterparts deliberately practicing all activities.
Figure 2 illustrates the elite and sub-elite group’s mean hours of deliberate
practice by age for (1) swimming activities, (2) swimming and non-swimming
activities directly related to improving swimming performance, and (3) all activities.
The left panels of Figure 2 reflect the number of hours practiced each year, while the
right panels illuminate the accumulation of those annual hours, from the ages of 6 to
24 years. The cumulative mean hours illustrated at each age in Figure 2 reflect data
for those swimmers who were actively swimming at each age so as to account for the
Table 3. Non-swimming activities each swimmer was engaged in before and during swimming
career
Swimmer # Swimming related activities Non-swimming related activities
E1 Physical therapy, weights, spinning Triathlon, synchronized swimming
E2 Physical therapy Soccer, basketball, golf, computer chatting
w/friends
E3a Physical therapy, weights, dryland(1)
work, spinning, running
Dance, basketball, soccer, skiing,
gymnastics
E3b Weights, running Softball, soccer, gymnastics, cooking, violin
E4 Weights, dryland(1) work, stretch
cords
Tennis, soccer, piano
E5 Weights, structured flexibility work Soccer, basketball
E6a Dryland(1) work, stretch cords Soccer, waterpolo, baseball, football, drums
E6b Dryland(1) work, stretch cords Golf, soccer, basketball, baseball
S1 Weights Soccer, softball, diving, cheerleading, piano
S2a Running Clarinet
S2b None Running, soccer, cello
S2c None None
S3 Weights Baseball, piano
S4a Weights, dryland(1) work, physical
therapy, stretch cords
Baseball, soccer, tennis, piano
S4b Weights, dryland(1) work, physical
therapy, stretch cords
Soccer, tennis, piano
S5 Dryland(1) work, weights Basketball, baseball, piano
S6a Dryland(1) work, weights Soccer, basketball
S6b Dryland(1) work, weights Baseball, soccer, motocross bicycle, trumpet
S6c Dryland(1) work, weights Netball, field hockey, ballet
1Dryland work includes abdominal work (sit-ups, crunches…), core body exercises, yoga, Pilates,
and medicine balls.
Talent and expert sport development 125
late start of some swimmers (e.g., E6a and E6b), and the youthful ages of E2, S2a,
and S2b.
Visual inspection of Figure 2 indicates that the mean hours practicing of the elite
and sub-elite groups are very similar. At the age of 11 the average for each group’s
cumulative hours of deliberate practice in swimming exceeded 1,000 hours for the
first time. At the age of 19 years the mean of each group exceeded 5,000 hours, with
the sub-elite swimmers having engaged in slightly more hours, 5,138 and 5,090,
respectively. The only age at which these two groups meaningfully differ is after the
age of 22; an age most sub-elite swimmers ceased their swimming activities.
Both groups participated in approximately the same amount of deliberate prac-
tice in all activities from the ages of 6 to 12 (see Figure 2, panel c). At age 13,
however, the total number of hours engaged in by members of the elite group began
to exceed the hours engaged in by members of the sub-elite group. During the
swimmers’ 13th year of age the mean hours of deliberate practice for the elite group
was 19.9% more than the mean for the sub-elite group. From the ages of 14 through
18 the elite swimmers’ mean annual hours exceeded those of the sub-elite group by
40.5%, 6.7%, 13.4%, 34.0%, and 18.9%. Additionally, from the ages of 14 to 18 the
elite group’s mean cumulative hours of deliberate practice exceeded the sub-elites
group’s mean 4.8%, 5.1%, 6.3%, 9.4%, and 10.2%. Furthermore, after the age of
17, both groups’ mean annual hours of deliberate practice decreased. The causes for
this decrease were twofold: (1) the focus of the swimmers’ training shifted to a
greater emphasis on quality over quantity, and (2) the impact of injuries on the hours
spent training.
Table 4. Swimmers’ age and cumulative hours of deliberate practice in competitive swimming and
all activities at their first significant achievement
Swimmer # Age Hours of Deliberate Practice
Swim Focus All Activities
E1 (f) 16 7,488 8,640
E3a (f) 18 5,022 6,754
E3b (f) 18 8,032 8,656
E4 (m) 21 10,099 11,319
E5 (m) 22 10,019 10,295
E6a (m) 22 6,289 7,587
E6b (m) 19 2,956 9,036
S1 (f) 16 3,600 7,200
S2c (f) 18 7,866 7,866
S3 (f) 22 5,928 7,840
S4a (m) 19 8,622 10,434
S4b (m) 20 8,253 9,473
S5 (m) 22 9,978 10,624
S6a (m) 22 9,984 10,993
S6b (m) 22 6,155 6,843
S6c (f) 22 9,987 11,491
126 M. B. Johnson et al.
Figure 2. Mean annual and cumulative hours the swimmers of each group spent deliberately
practicing (a) swimming, (b) swimming and non-swimming activities directly related to enhancing
swimming performance, and (c) all activities, by age and skill level
Talent and expert sport development 127
The similarities and differences between these two groups of swimmers revealed in
Tables 1–4 and Figure 2 necessitated additional analyses to provide further insight
into the factors that play a role in the development of athletic expertise. As an initial
probe the members of each group were compared among themselves. Figures 3 and
4 illustrate each individual’s hours of deliberate practice. Figure 3 consists of the
annual (left panel) and cumulative (right panel) hours each (1) elite and (2) sub-elite
swimmer spent deliberately practicing activities that were designed specifically to
enhance swimming performance. Figure 4 includes each swimmer’s hours of
deliberate practice in all domains, not merely those designed specifically to enhance
swimming performance.
Every swimmer led a very active life; none spent much time engaging in sedentary/
diversionary activities. However, numerous differences among this study’s swimmers
emerged. At the age of 16, members of the elite group had accumulated between 196
Figure 3. Annual and cumulative hours each (a) elite and (b) sub-elite swimmer spent deliberately
practicing activities designed specifically to enhance swimming performance, by age
128 M. B. Johnson et al.
(E6b) and 7,488 (E1) hours of deliberate swimming practice. At age 20 the gap
ranged from a low of 4,156 (E6b) to a high of 12,048 (E1). However, by this age
both E1 and E6b were Olympic gold medalists, E6b owned one world record, and
E1 had recorded the 3rd best time in history in her two primary events. Additionally,
E1 had been the top ranked swimmer in those events for 5 years.
The sub-elite swimmers showed a commensurate breadth in their developmental
training experiences. S4a had 5,639 hours of deliberate practice at age of 16, while
S3 had accumulated 2,160 hours at the same age. By the age of 20 the cumulative
hours of deliberate practice that members of the sub-elite had engaged in ranged
from 4,815 (S6b) to 9,694 (S2c). Furthermore, prior to qualifying for the U.S.
Olympic Trials, S1 accumulated 3,600 hours of deliberate swimming practice,
whereas S4a had engaged in 7,634 hours before he qualified for the same
competition. However, S4a began his swimming career at a far younger age than S1.
Figure 4. Annual and cumulative hours each (a) elite and (b) sub-elite swimmer spent deliberately
practicing all activities, by age
Talent and expert sport development 129
Interestingly, the number of hours engaged in deliberate practice by select sub-elite
swimmers at the time of their highest achievement were 7,866 hours for S2c (U.S.
Junior National Champion), 8,253 hours for S4b (U.S. National Championships
Rookie of the Meet), and 9,987 hours for S6c (College Conference Most Valuable
Performer). Furthermore, S1 engaged in the largest amount of deliberate practice in
any one year of those in the sub-elite group, i.e., 1,200 hours during the age of 18
years. This one-year total was only exceeded by E1 who was the second most
decorated female swimmer in her discipline in the history of the sport. Ironically,
after her 18th year of age swimmer S1 quit the sport.
In summary, differences between each group’s average number of hours spent
deliberately practicing was minimal. However, there were dramatic differences
among all 19 swimmers, regardless of skill-level, in (1) the number of hours spent
deliberately practicing, (2) the number and type of activities they participated during
their development, and (3) the age at which activities, including swimming,
commenced.
Discussion
Theories averring to explain the development of expert sport performance (e.g.,
Bloom, 1985; Cote, 1999; Ericsson et al., 1993) guided this study’s questions and
method of investigation. The principles of deliberate practice and the stages of elite
athletic development were constructed via analyses of experts’ hours practiced in
multiple domains. One way to potentially strengthen the conclusions drawn from
these empirical works is to conduct research that goes beyond the accounts and
experiences of elite and novice athletes by initiating research methods that are more
sensitive to differences between elite and sub-elite athletes who had similar
developmental experiences. Findings from this study and from previous research
can neither individually nor collectively, definitively indicate whether (1) deliberate
practice leads to expert performance, or (2) people who possess the potential for
expert performance are able to engage in copious amounts of deliberate practice.
Some individuals in this study engaged in deliberate practice while being exposed to
a facilitative environment, yet they did not achieve expert performances. Differences
in peoples’ inherent physical and psychological attributes may impact their potential
level of achievement in a specific domain.
This study reconstructed the developmental experiences and stages of 8 elite and
11 sub-elite swimmers, all of whom engaged in copious amounts of swimming and/
or non-swimming activities when young. Research has illustrated that early
specialization in one, or a limited number of sports, may negatively impact the
development of athletic expertise. Too much specialization too early or too intensely
may be antithetical with respect to optimal athletic development (Baker, 2003).
There may be physiological and psychological advantages to engaging in a greater
variety of activities during one’s athletic development providing the athlete with the
opportunity to develop a greater assortment of facilitative coping options. Evidence
presented in Table 3 somewhat supports the contention that engaging in multiple
130 M. B. Johnson et al.
sports during one’s development is positively correlated with a high level of
performance in swimming. It also appears that engaging in multiple activities when
young may not be a differentiating factor leading to expert athletic performance.
There are apparently other factors that interact with non-swimming sport
involvement that facilitate or inhibit the achievement of elite swimming performance
as all of the swimmers in this study were very accomplished athletes. Data from this
study support the concept that in some cases there must be something in addition to
exposure to a broad athletic environment that mediates eventual athletic
performance level as this study’s elite swimmers participated in a broad range of
activities during their first two developmental stages.
The findings here also delineated a number of achievement milestones in an effort
to uncover any potential effect these had on eventual athletic performance. As these
data illuminate, neither (1) the age at which an individual initially engaged in the
sport of swimming, (2) the age at which they decided to be an elite swimmer, nor (3)
the age when the swimmer began non-swimming activities with the purpose of
improving their swimming performance differentiated between swimmers who
achieved elite swimming performance and those failed. However, there does appear
to be a difference between groups in the ability to explicitly express the wish to
become a world-class performer. All 7 of the adult elite swimmers explicitly
expressed this intention and their statements of intent were confirmed via interviews
with their coaches and parents. Only 5 of the 9 adult sub-elite swimmers made such
a concrete statement.
A third aspect that received substantial attention in this study involved the number
of annual hours each swimmer engaged in deliberate practice over the span of their
careers. Intergroup homogeneity was found in the mean hours of deliberate practice
that each group engaged in. However, the sub-elite group, on average, accumulated
more hours of deliberate practice up to the age of 20, which is approximately the age
at which 10,000 hours of deliberate practice was reported in other domains
(Ericsson et al., 1993). This may indicate a rather significant finding in this study. A
number of elite swimmers attained elite performances long before reaching the
10,000-hour milestone, while some of the elite swimmers never reached 10,000
hours over the course of their entire careers, indicating both person and task-specific
features must be considered in this line of research.
Intra-group differences in hours of deliberate practice were greater than were the
inter-group differences. This indicates the highly idiosyncratic nature of elite athletic
development. For example, two salient comparisons, as they relate to the current
theoretical bases of expert athletic development, were: (1) the swimmers from Site 4,
and (2) swimmers E1 and E6b. The swimmers from Site 4 are of interest because the
three are brothers. Their training site offered a unique opportunity for under-
standing expert development as all three young men grew up in the same household,
trained with the same club team and coach, and attended the same high school and
university. All three trained with and competed for the same university at the same
time. The middle son earned a gold medal at the 2004 Athens Olympics. His
brothers qualified for and competed in the U.S. National Championships, yet
Talent and expert sport development 131
neither of these two ranked in the top 50 in the world. The individual who coached
them from the ages of 14 to 18 years provided perhaps the most thought-provoking
statement during the approximately 45 hours of interview data collected when he
stated: ‘Hard work beats talent, until talent decides to work hard.’ His comment
succinctly expresses the primary hypothesis of this study. Data collected from these
three swimmers, their coach, and their mother illustrated a number of common-
alities and differences among them. One of the consistent behaviors they all
exhibited was a willingness to train rigorously with the goal of being the best
swimmer in the world. However, to date, only one of them achieved this status.
There is a distinct possibility that, in addition to effortful and intelligently applied
work, there are other factors leading to exceptional athletic performances.
A comparison between swimmers E1 and E6b is also of significant interest.
Swimmer E1 started swimming at the age of 6 years, exhibited exceptionally strong
motivational tendencies, and engaged in years of practice resulting in a 5-year span
(i.e., age 16–20 years) as the top ranked swimmer in her discipline in the world.
Swimmer E6b did not begin his competitive swimming career, from a deliberate
practice perspective, until he was a senior in high school (i.e., at age 17). Within
eight months he was one of the top swimmers in the world in his discipline. A year
later he won an Olympic gold medal in Sydney, Australia. His swimming experience
in terms of the amount of deliberate swimming practice was far less than E1’s;
however, his motivational capacity, self-awareness, and attentional focus were highly
similar to E1’s. It appears that factors in addition to those found in deliberate
practice play a major role in expertise development. In the case of E6b, these other
factors worked with his physical training in a systemic manner that permitted him to
become a World Record holder in swimming after less than two years of competitive
swimming. Limited swimming practice, and a lack of domain-specific learned
coping skills, have not constrained his performance attainment, strongly indicating
the presence of unmeasured talent-related factors that played a substantial role in
E6b’s elite achievement.
The case studies presented in this research lend support for, and expansion of,
Ericsson et al.’s (1993) concept of deliberate practice. For example, E1 earned a
bronze medal at the World Swimming Championships at the age of 14, which was
well before she accumulated 10,000 hours of deliberate practice. E6b reached the
highest level of performance with even fewer hours of deliberate practice. As
previously noted, three individuals who all experienced the same parents, training
facilities, and workload achieved different levels of performance. Based on the
evidence provided by these and the other 14 swimmers in this study, the principles
included in the concept of deliberate practice are an important part of understanding
the factors involved in achieving elite athletic performance. There appears to be
some additional factor(s) involved, and it is likely that one of those factors is a
natural one, i.e., genetic predisposition.
E1’s comments at the conclusion of her interview imply that the concept of
deliberate practice does not fully explain expert athletic achievement. Her answer
to the question: ‘What do you feel contributes to a swimmer achieving top
132 M. B. Johnson et al.
performances (e.g., world records) vs. excellent performances?’ included a number
of statements. She reported that she has a very supportive group of people in her life,
and that it has always been her goal to be the best, her willingness to make sacrifices
and work hard that were vital to her eventual achievement level and not someone
else’s. Additionally, she reported:
There were a number of people that worked with me in the distance group and did
pretty much stroke for stroke, yard for yard that I did. But maybe not as hard… I think
the difference may have been focus, desire.
She then added, ‘I think talent plays a role too.’ This is potentially of great
importance because her decade-long history of performing at the highest level in
swimming has led her to an understanding that there is likely an additional factor
(i.e., talent) that some possess and others lack. Additionally, she feels that this factor
plays a role in one’s athletic potential. All 41 participants reported that it is their
impression that talent plays a role in achieving elite swimming performance.
It is apparent from the data presented in this study that the presence of an expert
coach who has a history of guiding athletes to the highest performance level may be a
highly facilitative, yet insufficient environmental stimulus for some athletes to reach
elite performance levels. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that there may be other, as
yet unobservable, factors in addition to the deliberate practice time one engages in
that mediate performance level in sports, i.e., genetic predispositions. Lyubomirsky
(2001) proposed that it may be possible for genes and traits to influence one’s
performance level indirectly via intervening, and potentially malleable, cognitive and
motivational processes. An interaction among factors such as one’s physical
attributes and psychological skills may exist in a manner that mediates one’s
performance level in athletic domains.
An individual’s ability to even engage in deliberate practice may be impacted by
their psychological predispositions. Recently, Bonanno (2004) addressed differences
in people’s resilience and resistance to stress. Bonanno noted that when confronted
with stress there are multiple, and sometimes unexpected, pathways to resilience,
and that some people continue to have positive emotional experiences, and show
only minor and transient disruptions in their ability to function relative to others. In
the sport domain this may mean that some people have a predisposition to positively
managing the stress associated with training and competing, i.e., engage in high
levels of deliberate practice.
A theory of expertise development in the motor domain must extend Ericsson
et al.’s (1993) deliberate practice principles. For example, Figure 5 presents a 4-
factor model of expert athletic development which is very similar to the model
presented in Figure 1. This 4-factor model posits that there is likely an interac-
tion among (1) hard, idiosyncratically appropriate workloads, (2) a supportive
environment, (3) one’s facilitative coping skills, and (4) an athlete’s predis-
position to achieve exceptional athletic performance. Physical and psychological
predispositions dictated at the moment of conception impact one’s future ability to
implement high effort (i.e., deliberate practice) and positively interact with a
supportive environment via facilitative coping strategies when encountering life’s
Talent and expert sport development 133
challenges and learning opportunities (i.e., resiliency). How these factors develop
and interact to mediate athletic achievement are fruitful and vital areas of future
research.
A number of studies lend support to the 4-factor model of elite athletic
development proposed in this study. Mallett and Hanrahan (2004) illustrated
several processes that appear to be associated with elite track and field athletes
including (1) high motivation with personal goals, (2) high self-efficacy, and (3)
sport being central in the life of the athlete. The development of these processes
at a young age is likely a prerequisite of later elite performance. Additionally,
Minuchin et al. (1978) proposed a ‘systems theory’ positing that organisms tend to
maintain themselves within preferred ranges. Potential change that is perceived as
too great, too sudden, or too far beyond a subjective threshold of tolerance, is
likely to produce behavior moving the system back toward its pre-existing
homeostatic state. Therefore, once an athlete constructs their strategies for
interacting with the self and the environment, they will likely behave in a manner
congruent with maintaining this state. In some situations these schema may move
the athlete toward elite performance, and in others they may impede advancement to
the top. The system involved in the development of expert athletic performance
appears to be highly idiosyncratic and multidimensional. The 4-factor model of
expert athletic development proposed here conceptualizes the idiosyncratic and
systemic nature of expert athletic development. Athletes of differing performance
levels may encounter similarly supportive environments (e.g., coach, training
opportunities, and familial support) and early success, yet their eventual
performance levels may differ.
References
Baker, J. (2003) Early specialization in youth sport: a requirement for adult expertise? High Ability
Studies, 14(1), 85–94.
Figure 5. A 4-factor model positing the necessary and sufficient factors required for attaining
expert athletic performance
134 M. B. Johnson et al.
Bloom, B. S. (1985) Developing talent in young people (New York, Ballentine).
Bonanno, G. A. (2004) Loss, trauma, and human resilience: have we underestimated the
human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events, American Psychologist, 59(1),
20–28.
Cote, J. (1999) The influence of the family in the development of talent in sport, The Sport
Psychologist, 13, 395–417.
Cote, J., Ericsson, K. A. & Law, M. (2005) Tracing the development of athletes using
retrospective interview methods: a proposed interview and validation procedure for reported
information, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17(1), 1–19.
Darwin, C. (1859/1964) On the origin of species (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).
Dawes, R. M. (1994) House of cards: psychology and psychotherapy built on myth (New York, Free
Press).
Deakin, J. M. & Cobley, S. (2003) An examination of the practice environments in figure skating
and volleyball: a search for deliberate practice, in: J. L. Starkes & K. A. Ericsson (Eds) Recent
advances in research on sport expertise (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics).
Eisenberger, R. (1998) Achievement: the importance of industriousness, Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 21, 412–13.
Ericsson, K. A. (1998a) Basic capacities can be modified or circumvented by deliberate practice: a
rejection of talent accounts of expert performance, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21,
413–14.
Ericsson, K. A. (1998b) The scientific study of expert levels of performance: general implications
for optimal learning and creativity, High Ability Studies, 9(1), 75–100.
Ericsson, K. A. (2001) The path to expert golf performance: insights from the masters on how to
improve performance by deliberate practice, in: P. R. Thomas (Ed.) Optimising Performance
in Golf (Brisbane, Australian Academic Press), 1–57.
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T. & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993) The role of deliberate practice in the
acquisition of expert performance, Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.
Ericsson, K. A. & Lehman, A. C. (1996) Expert and exceptional performance: evidence of
maximal adaptation to task constraints, Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.
Gualdi-Russo, E. & Graziani, I. (1993) Anthropometric somatotype of Italian sport participants,
The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 33(3), 282–91.
Helsen, W., Hodges, N. J., Van Winckel, J. & Starkes, J. L. (2000) The roles of talent, physical
precocity, and practice in the development of soccer expertise, Journal of Sport Sciences,
18(9), 727–36.
Helsen, W., Starkes, J. L. & Hodges, N. J. (1998) Team sports and the theory of deliberate
practice, Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 20, 13–25.
Lyubomirsky, S. (2001) Why are some people happier than others? The role of cognitive and
motivational processes in well-being, American Psychologist, 56, 239–49.
Mallett, C. J. & Hanrahan, S. J. (2004) Elite athletes: why does the ‘fire’ burn so brightly?,
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5, 183–200.
Minuchin, S., Rosman, B. L. & Baker, L. (1978) Psychosomatic families: anorexia nervosa in context
(Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).
Patton, M. Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd edn) (Thousand Oaks, CA,
Sage).
Pelliccia, A. (1996) Determinants of morphologic cardiac adaptation in elite athletes: the role of
athletic training and constitutional factors, International Journal of Sports Medicine, 17(3),
S157–63.
Rose, R. J. (1995) Genes and human behavior, Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 625–54.
Rubin, H. J. & Rubin, I. S. (1995) Qualitative Interviewing: the Art of Hearing Data (Thousand
Oaks, CA, Sage).
Seidman, I. E. (1991) Interviewing as qualitative research: a guide for researchers in education and the
social sciences (New York, Teachers College).
Talent and expert sport development 135
Stael von Holstein, C. A. S. (1972) Probabilistic forecasting: an experiment related to the stock
market, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 139–58.
Starkes, J. L., Deakin, J. M., Allard, F., Hodges, N. J. & Hayes, A. (1996) Deliberate prac-
tice in sport: What is it anyway?, in: K. A. Ericsson (Ed.) The road to excellence: the acquisition
of expert performance in the arts and science, sports and games (Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum),
81–106.
Tenenbaum, G. (1999) The development of expertise in sport: nature and nurture, International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 30, 113–16.
Thomas, K. T. & Thomas, J. (1999) What squirrels in the trees predicts about expert athletes,
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 30, 221–34.
Young, B. W. (1998) Deliberate practice and skill acquisition in Canadian middle distance running.
Master’s thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada.
136 M. B. Johnson et al.
Top Related