Reviewed by Dr. Teralyn Sell
One of the most misleading things in performance is a clean practice session.
You repeat the same sequence. The environment is quiet. The timing is predictable. Feedback is immediate. By the end, you look sharp.
Then the real moment arrives with interruptions, incomplete information, a clock, an audience, competing priorities, or consequence. Suddenly, the skill that felt automatic is harder to access.
That doesn’t always mean you didn’t prepare. It may mean you prepared for a version of the task that no longer exists.
Practice performance is not the same as learning
I think this distinction deserves more attention: performing well during practice and building a skill that transfers are related, but they are not identical.
Motor-learning research has long shown that blocked practice, where one variation is repeated again and again, can produce better performance during acquisition. Random or mixed practice often looks messier in the moment. Yet the classic contextual-interference research suggests that introducing variation can strengthen later retention when the performer has to select, retrieve, and adapt rather than simply repeat.
That’s the uncomfortable part. The conditions that make practice feel fluent may not be the conditions that make a skill durable.
And before we turn this into another “make everything harder” slogan, the research is more nuanced than that. A more recent experimental study found that variable practice is not automatically superior in every circumstance. The goal is not randomness for its own sake. The goal is to create enough meaningful variation that the performer learns what matters, what can change, and what response still works.
Train the retrieval, not only the routine
In high-demand work, the task is rarely just the task.
A clinician may know the procedure but need to make the decision amid competing alarms and shifting information. A leader may know the message but need to deliver it after an unexpected challenge. An athlete may have the technical skill but need to find it after a bad call, a momentum swing, or a change in strategy.
Pressure changes the access problem. Research on pressure-performance specificity has found that changing pressure conditions between practice and later performance can produce a transfer cost, even when the underlying task stays the same. In that study, the shift affected planning processes especially strongly. The conditions surrounding execution mattered, not just the movement or decision itself.
So, a useful preparation question is not simply, “Have we practiced this enough?” It’s also, “Have we practiced retrieving this when the situation is less cooperative?”
That could mean changing the order of tasks, requiring a decision before execution, adding realistic communication demands, reducing preparation time, or occasionally rehearsing after a mistake. The variations should resemble the demands that actually disrupt performance, not somebody’s idea of toughness.
In other words, don’t confuse a polished rehearsal with reliable execution. If the real environment changes the problem, preparation has to include learning how to find your way back to the skill when it does.
Dr. Teralyn Sell, PhD, LPC, NCC
Psychotherapist | Brain Health & Human Performance Consultant
Dr. Teralyn Sell has more than 20 years of experience in psychology, mental health, and human performance. Her work focuses on how stress, brain health, emotional regulation, and recovery influence decision-making and performance in demanding environments.
She is the author of Your Best Brain and works with individuals seeking to improve their capacity, resilience, and performance.