Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Motor learning research has predominantly modeled the learner as an isolated information processor, yielding robust insights into practice schedules and feedback design while leaving the social conditions of skill acquisition comparatively underexamined. This article applies Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to reframe motor learning as a socially embedded process and advances the hypothesis that relatedness—understood here as the learner’s sense of being cared for, respected, and connected to relevant others—functions as a contextual catalyst shaping how autonomy and competence support translate into learning gains. Three testable propositions are advanced: (a) an amplification hypothesis, predicting that autonomy- and competence-supportive practices yield stronger learning effects when relatedness satisfaction is high; (b) a safety-to-exploration pathway, positing that psychological safety mediates the relation between relatedness satisfaction and adaptive learning behaviors such as error tolerance and strategic variability; and (c) a cooperative-structure advantage, proposing that dyadic and team-based formats outperform individual practice when they support relatedness satisfaction and enable informational dialogue. Boundary conditions are also identified—task complexity, expertise level, cultural context, and evaluation pressure—under which these effects may vary, attenuate, or reverse. These ideas are integrated into the Socially Embedded Motor Learning (SEML) framework, together with a methodological agenda emphasizing multi-session designs, multilevel analysis, and psychophysiological or neurocognitive measurement. Practical implications for coaches, physical educators, and rehabilitation professionals are also outlined. By making the social dimension of motor learning theoretically explicit and empirically testable, the SEML framework offers a research program linking motivational psychology, motor control, and pedagogy.
Chang-Ha Im (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: