“Just as an experienced doctor is able to diagnose certain ailments the instant a new patient walks into his office…so we, perhaps, may learn to recognise the future scientific crank when we first encounter him. And encounter him we shall. If the present trend continues, we can expect a wide variety of these men, with theories yet unimaginable, to put in their appearance in the years immediately ahead. They will write impressive books, give inspiring lectures, organize exciting cults. They may achieve a following of one–or one million. In any case, it will be well for ourselves and for society if we are on our guard against them.” (Gardiner, 1952, p. 11).
Introduction
A range of applied sport scientists work with high performance athletes every day. For example, nutritionists provide guidance on diet, strength and conditioning specialists oversee physical training programmes, physiotherapists oversee injury prevention and rehabilitation regimens and psychologists support the mental side of preparation, performance and recovery. Through working with these applied scientists, athletes often gain a better understanding of the discipline (i.e., what a healthy diet looks like, what an effective training programme looks like). Indeed, many applied scientists might say that part of their role is educational – not just improving performance now, but laying the foundations for a better working relationship and improved performance in the future through explicitly enhancing the athlete’s understanding of the discipline. In this blog, I will consider whether that educational aspect of the role should explicitly consider critical thinking.
What is critical thinking?
Critical thinking means “setting out actively to understand what is going on by using reasoning, evaluating evidence and thinking carefully about the process of thinking itself” (Chatfield, 2022, p. 10). In practice, critical thinking is a set of behaviours – pausing at appropriate times, finding sources of quality information, and breaking down big questions into smaller questions, among many others. For example, within my domain of sport science, a common question is whether athletes or teams should invest in General Vision Training (Page et al., 2013), programmes designed to improve basic visual functions such as depth perception and the tracking of moving objects using non-sport specific stimuli. An example ‘big question’ is therefore: Does General Vision Training enhance athlete performance? It is helpful to break this big question down into a series of smaller questions: (i) Do we see consistent expert-novice differences on tests of general visual functions? (ii) If we impair general visual functions, does performance decline? (iii) Can general visual functions be improved with training? (iv) If so, can improvements in general visual functions be connected to improvements in sporting performance? Answering a series of smaller questions allows us to build a picture of the broader evidence base for a concept and reach a conclusion we can be more confident in.
Sport and Pseudoscience
Sport is a happy hunting ground for pseudoscience. From cupping, cryotherapy, and acupuncture within the UFC’s Las Vegas performance institute (Tiller, 2024a), “brain protection” devices which have been tested and found wanting (Smoliga & Yang, 2025), nasal breathing (Illidi et al., 2023), and the brightly coloured Kinesio-Tape which can be seen decorating the joints of athletes across many sporting codes (Tiller, 2002), the sporting world contains many examples of products with eye-catching marketing but limited supporting evidence (Tiller, 2020). Of course it does – in sport, the primary pressure on participants is not to be correct, but to be the first to gain a competitive advantage, or at least, not to be left behind. Furthermore, it is not unknown for extraordinary athletes such as Michael Phelps (Tiller, 2024b) or Novac Djokovic (Tiller, 2023) to endorse pseudoscience. And athletes and coaches may think: “Well, if it worked for them, why not for me?” without thinking carefully about what it means for something to “work” (Kearney et al., 2024). In the face of all of these pressures, it must be difficult for athletes to maintain a critical mindset.
Why develop critical thinking in athletes?
There are multiple reasons to deliberately focus on the development of critical thinking as part of the holistic support of athletes. First, today’s critical thinking athlete is less likely to be fooled by tomorrow’s spoofer. While few things can be guaranteed in sport, the likelihood of meeting a spoofer is high. Second, today’s critical thinking athlete is tomorrow’s critical thinking coach. Most sports coaches are former athletes. It is never too early to plant the seeds to make future working relationships between applied sport scientists and coaches more productive.
So how should applied sport scientists proceed to introduce critical thinking to their athletes? I have a growing collection of books on skeptical thinking relating to science subjects, from Hering’s Foibles and Fallacies of Science (published 1924) to Gardner’s Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science (1957) to Flim-Flam! by James Randi (1982) to the more focused Nick Tiller’s The Skeptic’s Guide to Sports Science (2020). One lesson I have taken from this historical perspective is that it might be helpful to focus less on debunking – it appears that people aren’t listening – and instead focus on promoting what works and why. When introducing a new intervention to an athlete, commenting upon what you are looking for by way of evidence to make your recommendation and what you have found may – over time – encourage athletes to ask similar questions.
Conclusion
Incorporating critical thinking into the development of athletes serves not only to debunk the latest fad, but to equip athletes with a permanent intellectual toolkit. By shifting the focus from reactionary debunking to the proactive promotion of evidence-based practices, applied sport scientists can do more than just save an athlete from a “spoofer” – they can foster a mindset of inquiry that provides a competitive advantage long after the athlete’s playing days are over.
References
Gardner, M. (1957). Fads and fallacies in the name of science (2nd ed.). New American Library.
Hering, D. W. (1924). Foibles and fallacies of science: An account of celebrated scientific vagaries. George Routledge & Sons Ltd.
Illidi, C. R., Romer, L. M., Johnson, M. A., Williams, N. C., Rossiter, H. B., Casaburi, R., & Tiller, N. B. (2023). Distinguishing science from pseudoscience in commercial respiratory interventions: An evidence-based guide for health and exercise professionals. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 123(8), 1599–1625. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10013266/.
Kearney, P. E., Nugent, F. J., & Harrison, A. (2024). Distinguishing the truths from the myths: The Dual Axis Framework. In A. Whitehead & J. Coe (Eds.), Myths of sports performance. Sequoia Books.
Randi, J. (1982). Flim-flam! Psychics, ESP, unicorns and other delusions. Prometheus Books.
Smoliga, J. M., & Yang, M. (2025). How an FDA cleared “brain protection” device built on shaky science made it to the NFL. BMJ, 391, Article r2028. https://www.bmj.com/content/391/bmj.r2028.
Tiller, N. B. (2020). The skeptic’s guide to sports science: Confronting myths of the health and fitness industry. Routledge.
Tiller, N. B. (2022). Kinesio tape: A magnificent marketing machine. Skeptical Inquirer. https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/kinesio-tape-a-magnificent-marketing-machine/.
Tiller, N. B. (2023). Novak Djokovic and the pseudoscience grand slam. Skeptical Inquirer. https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/novak-djokovic-and-the-pseudoscience-grand-slam/.
Tiller, N. B. (2024a). Back inside the UFC’s pseudoscience crisis. Skeptical Inquirer. https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/back-inside-the-ufcs-pseudoscience-crisis/.
Tiller, N. B. (2024b). From gods to gurus: The evolution of Olympic superstition and pseudoscience. Skeptical Inquirer. https://skepticalinquirer.org/2024/06/from-gods-to-gurus-the-evolution-of-olympic-superstition-and-pseudoscience/.
Author’s Bio:
| Dr. Phil Kearney is the Course Leader for the MSc Applied Sports Coaching at the University of Limerick. A Fellow of the Higher Education Authority, his teaching and research centres on the domain of skill acquisition, particularly as it relates to youth sport. A regular contributor to RTÉ Brainstorm, Phil is a member of the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Player & Coach Development Advisory Group, an Associate Editor for Perceptual and Motor Skills and is on the Editorial Board of the Journal of Motor Learning and Development. Phil is a co-founder of Movement and Skill Acquisition Ireland. |