Table 5.
Narrative synthesis of the effectiveness of interventions in controlled designs (n = 27).
| Study | Groups | Intervention duration | Statistical analysis | Outcome variables | Main results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sessions (min. p. session) | Weeks | |||||
| Differential Learning (DL; n = 8) | ||||||
| Bozkurt (2018)a | - DL (n = 6) - TL (n = 6) |
12 (20) | 4 | U-Test and Wilcoxon |
Skill tests: - passing - dribbling - feet-juggling |
No significant differences between groups in technical outcomes were found at pre- or post-test. Thus, neither DL nor TL was found to be more effective for promoting soccer-specific techniques. |
| Coutinho et al. (2018)a | - DL U15 (n = 9) - DL U17 (n = 6) - Usual care U15 (n = 9) - Usual care U17 (n = 6) |
20 (25) | 10 | Non-clinical magnitude-based inferences |
In-game: - Technical performance (dribbles, shots, and goals) - Creativity (fluency, attempts, and versatility) |
In U15, greater improvements after DL compared to TL in all technical variables, fluency, and versatility were found. In U17, DL only achieved greater improvements in shooting, while no effects in further outcomes were found. |
| Hossner et al. (2016) | - DL (n = 9) - DL and FB (n = 9) - TL (n = 10) |
12 (30) | 6 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill-test: - Shooting accuracy |
No significant interactions between the DL and TL groups, as well as DL with and without feedback groups, were found. |
| Ozuak and Çaglayan (2019) | - DL (n = 26) - Usual care (n = 26) |
24 (40–50) | 8 | U-Test and Wilcoxon |
Skill tests: - Creative speed test - Dribbling - Juggling - Passing |
The DL group achieved significantly greater improvements in creative speed and ball dribbling tests. No significant differences compared to the usual care group were found in juggling and passing. |
| Santos et al. (2018) | - DL U13 (n = 10) - DL U15 (n = 10) - TL U13 (n = 10) - TL U15 (n = 10) |
40 (30) | 20 | ANCOVA |
In-game: - Creativity (fails, attempts, fluency, versatility, and originality) in passes, dribbles, and shots |
DL led to significantly greater effects in few creative components in both ages compared to TL. A decrease in fails in both ages was found. Significant differences were also found in attempts, originality, and most stressed in versatility. More significant and higher effect sizes were found in the U13 age group. |
| Schöllhorn et al. (2006; study 1) | - DL (n = 8) - TL (n = 8) |
12 (20–40) | 4 | U-test |
Skill test: - Passing accuracy with non-dominant foot |
Significant differences at post-test between groups reveal a greater effectiveness of DL in non-dominant foot passing accuracy compared to TL. |
| Schöllhorn et al. (2006; study 2) | - DL (n = 8) - TL (n = 8) |
12 (25) | 6 | U-test |
Skill test: - Shooting accuracy |
Significantly greater improvements after DL in shooting accuracy were found. DL also outperformed TL after 1-year retention period. |
| Schöllhorn et al. (2012) | - DL blocked (n = 4) - DL random (n = 4) - TL (n = 4) |
8 (25) | 4 | H-Test |
Skill tests: - Ball control - Shooting accuracy |
In the acquisition phase, only the blocked DL achieved greater improvements in goal shooting. At retention-test only the random DL outperformed TL. No differences in ball control were found. |
| Teaching Games for Understanding (TGFU; n = 2) | ||||||
| Práxedes et al. (2016) | - TGFU (n = 9) - TL (n = 9) |
21 (60) | 12 | MANOVA |
In-game: - Decision-making (passing and dribbling) - Skill execution (passing and dribbling) |
TGFU was found to be significantly more effective than TL in promoting decision-making (passing and dribbling). The only significant difference in the execution variables in favor of TGFU was found for passes. |
| Sierra-Ríos et al. (2020)a | - TGFU (n = 15) - DI (n = 15) |
12 (80) | 6 | MANCOVA |
In-game: - Decisions (on- and off-the-ball) - Executions (on- and off-the-ball) |
A significantly greater reduction in the number of unsuccessful on-the-ball executions, a decrease in off-the-ball errors, and more successful off-the-ball actions after TGFU were present. No differences in the successful on-the-ball performance were found. |
| Non-linear Pedagogy (NLP; n = 2) | ||||||
| Práxedes et al. (2018a) | - NLP (n = 10) - TL (n = 9) |
14 (60) | 7 | MANOVA |
In-game: - Decision-making (passing and dribbling) - Skill execution (passing and dribbling) |
No significant group × time interaction was found. However, at post-test, the NLP group significantly outperformed the TL group in passing decisions and executions. No differences were found in dribbles. |
| Roberts et al. (2020) | - NLP (n = 11) - IP (n = 11) |
8 (60) | 4 | U-Test and Wilcoxon |
Skill-test: - Strong foot finishing - Weak foot finishing−1v1 - Decision-making |
Significantly greater improvements in the NLP group compared to the IP group were found in 1v1 and decision-making skills. No significant differences were found in the technical shooting proficiency or the execution time. |
| Effects of technical drill practice (with additional SSGs or coordination training; n = 5) | ||||||
| Boraczyński et al. (2019)a | - PCT (n = 26) - Usual care (n = 27) - Non-active (n = 22) |
n.r. (30 min. add. practice) | 12 months | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests (dom. leg): - Turning the ball backward - Slalom dribbling - Static balance with a ball - Kicking accuracy |
Only in the static balance test with a ball, a group × time interaction was found due to greater improvements in the PCT group at peri- and post-test compared to the usual care group. |
| Kösal et al. (2020) | - Coordination (n = 15) - Usual care (n = 15) - Unstructured (n = 15) |
30 (30 min. add. practice) | 10 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Dribbling - Passing - Shooting - Ball bouncing - Wall volley |
The coordination group improved in all variables and fewer within-group effects were found compared to the usual care group. The unstructured practice group did not improve in any variable. However, no interaction effects were reported. |
| Montesano and Mazzeo (2019) | - Add. practice (n = 9) - Usual care (n = 9) |
n. r. (60-80) | n. r. | Descriptive analyses |
Skill tests: - Passing - Shooting |
Both groups descriptively improved in successful passes and goal shots. Descriptively greater improvements were found after add. practice. |
| Weigelt et al. (2000) | - Intervention (n = 10) - Non-active (n = 10) |
28 (10) | 4 | MANOVA |
Skill-tests: - Juggling with feet - Juggling with Knees - Ball control strong foot - Ball control weak foot |
A significant time x group effect due to improvements in knee juggling and ball control with both feet (transfer effect), as well as a trend toward better feet-juggling performance, was found. |
| Zago et al. (2016)a | - Intervention (n = 10) - Control (n = 10) |
38 ( to of the average session time of 98 min) | 22 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - LSPT - Shuttle dribble test - Slalom dribble test |
A significant time × group interaction was found in the LSPT performance (execution time) due to greater improvements in the IG. No significant interactions in other variables were found. |
| Practice to reduce lateral asymmetries or improve the non-dominant leg performance (n = 5) | ||||||
| Guilherme et al. (2015a) | Cross-over: - Group 1 (n = 26) - Group 2 (n = 24) |
48 (20) | 16 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
In-game: - Preferred foot performance utilization - Non-preferred foot performance utilization |
The non-dom. leg practice significantly increased the utilization rate during match-play. The interruption of the additional practice during the retention period partially reversed this effect. |
| Guilherme et al. (2015b) | - NPL U13 (n = 12) - NPL U15 (n = 11) - NPL U17 (n = 12) - CG U13 (n = 12) - CG U15 (n = 12) - CG U17 (n = 12) |
108 (20) | 36 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
In-game: - Preferred foot performance utilization - Non-preferred foot performance utilization |
The experimental practice program led to a significantly greater utilization rate of the non-preferred leg during match-play, while the use of the preferred leg significantly decreased. |
| Haaland and Hoff (2003)a | - Intervention (n = 18) - Usual care (n = 21) |
n. r. (n. r.) | 8 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Slalom dribbling - Ball control (chest) and volley shooting accuracy - One-touch passing accuracy |
Significantly greater improvements in the intervention group compared to the CG in both the dominant and non-dominant legs in dribbling, volley shooting, and one-touch passing variables. |
| Teixeira et al. (2003) | - 12-year PL (n = n. r.) - 13-year PL (n = n. r.) - 15-year PL (n = n. r.) - 12-year NPL (n = n. r.) - 13-year NPL (n = n. r.) - 15-year NPL (n = n. r.) |
80 (45) | 16 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Speed of dribbling - Kicking for accuracy - Kicking for force |
Only in speed dribbling, the lateral asymmetry was significantly reduced from pre- to post-test in the non-preferred-leg group. In other variables, no significant differences between groups were found due to improvements in both the preferred and non-preferred-leg groups. |
| Witkowski et al. (2011) | - Non-dom-leg (n = n. r.) - Both legs (n = n. r.) - Usual care (n = n. r.) |
144 (n. r.) | 12 months | t-tests |
Skill tests: - Dribbling - Ball striking |
Both the non-dominant and dominant leg groups achieved greater improvements in technical outcomes compared to the usual care group. |
| Effects of game-based practice programs (n = 2) | ||||||
| Arslan et al. (2020) | - SSG (n = 10) - HIIT (n = 10) |
10 (10–18) | 5 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Dribbling speed - Zigzag agility with ball |
Both groups improved in their technical performance from pre- to post-test. Higher within-group effects were found in the SSG group. No interaction effects were reported. |
| Radziminski et al. (2013)a | - SSG (n = 9) - Running (n = 10) |
16 (90) | 8 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Juggling - Rotation pass - Passing - Dribbling - Heading, - Bench passing - Shooting accuracy |
No significant group × time interaction was found. The performance increased in both the SSG and Running groups. |
| Practice with modified ball sizes (n = 2) | ||||||
| Bekris et al. (2012) | - Competitive (n = 12) - 20-min (n = 13) - 30-min (n = 14) - Control (n = 15) |
12 (20–30) | n. r. | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Passing - Juggling - Running with the ball - Turning |
Significantly greater improvements in juggling, running with the ball, and turning in all intervention groups compared to the CG were reported. No effects in passing were found. |
| Raastad et al. (2016) | - Smaller ball (n = 11) - Larger ball (n = 11) |
24 (10) | 6 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill tests: - Juggling - Ball reception |
The ball juggling performance of both groups increased from pre- to post-test, but no interaction effect regarding transfer effects was found. |
| Internal and external focus feedback (n = 1) | ||||||
| Schwab et al. (2019) | - Internal adol. (n = 10) - Internal adult (n = 18) - External adol. (n = 10) - External adult (n = 18) |
6 (20) | 3 | Repeated measures ANOVA |
Skill test: - Rotational ball velocity - Linear ball velocity |
External focus feedback led to a significantly greater reduction in the rotational ball velocity from pre- to post and pre- to ret-test. No effects on the linear ball velocity were found. |
Add., additional; Adol., adolescent; DI, Direct Instruction; DL, Differential Learning; DL and FB, Differential Learning and Feedback; HIIT, High-Intensity Interval Training; LSST, Loughborough Shooting Skill Test; TL, Traditional Learning; TGFU, Teaching Games for Understanding; NPL, non-preferred leg; PL, preferred leg; SSG, small-sided games.
a
Further variables, that do not correspond to the perceptual-motor or perceptual-cognitive skill domains (e.g., physiological outcomes), were investigated in the study.