Security Journal

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 645–659 | Cite as

From system to pedagogy: towards a nonlinear pedagogy of self-defense training in the police and the civilian domain

  • Swen Körner
  • Mario S. Staller
Original Article


Within public and academic spheres, the question of how civilians and police officers can effectively deal with violent assaults is discussed above all as a question of the “right self-defense system.” In the current paper, we advocate for a change from questions of system to questions of pedagogy. Based on the paradigm of nonlinear pedagogy and the underlying theories of complex dynamic systems, we present a model of representative learning design, whose analytical and practical use is presented. We conclude with a discussion of the role of nonlinear pedagogy for the professionalization of self-defense training in the civilian and law enforcement domains.


Skill development Self-defense systems Nonlinear pedagogy Police use of force Conflict management 


  1. Abraham, A., and D.J. Collins. 2011. Effective skill development: How should athletes’ skills be developed? In Performance Psychology: A Practitioner’s Guide, ed. A. Button, and H. Richards, 207–229. Chuchill Livingstone: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, G.S., R. Litzenberger, and D.B. Plecas. 2002. Physical evidence of police officer stress. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 25: 399–420. Scholar
  3. Araújo, D., K. Davids, and R. Hristovski. 2006. The ecological dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7: 653–676. Scholar
  4. Beck, U. 1992. Risk society. Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, N.A. 1967. The control and regulation of movements. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bernstein, N.A. 1996. On dexterity and its development, 3–246. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Bowman, P. 2017. Mythologies of martial arts. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  8. Broadbent, D.P., J. Causer, M.A. Williams, and P.R. Ford. 2015. Perceptual-cognitive skill training and its transfer to expert performance in the field: Future research directions. European Journal of Sport Science 15 (4): 322–331. Scholar
  9. Brunswik, E. 1956. Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments, 2nd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bundeskriminalamt (BKA). 2017. Gewalt gegen Polizeivollzugsbeamtinnen/-Beamte: Bundeslangebild 2016 [Violence against police officers: Federal statistics 2016]. Wiesbaden: Bundeskriminalamt (BKA).Google Scholar
  11. Bundesministerium des Inneren (BMI). 2016. Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik 2015 [Police crime statistics 2015]. Version 7.0. Wiesbaden: Bundeskriminalamt (BKA).Google Scholar
  12. Chow, J.Y., K. Davids, C. Button, and I. Renshaw. 2016. Nonlinear pedagogy in skill acquisition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Chow, J.Y., K. Davids, R. Hristovski, D. Araújo, and P. Passos. 2011. Nonlinear pedagogy: Learning design for self-organizing neurobiological systems. New Ideas in Psychology 29: 189–200. Scholar
  14. Chow, J.Y., K. Davids, I. Renshaw, and C. Button. 2013. The acquisition of movement skill in children through nonlinear pedagogy. In Conditions of children’s talent development in sport, ed. J. Côte, and R. Lidor, 41–59. Morgantown, WV: FIT.Google Scholar
  15. Collard, L., A. Oboeuf, and S. Ahmaidi. 2007. Motor skills transfer from gymnastics to swimming. Perceptual and Motor Skills 105 (1): 15–26. Scholar
  16. Davids, K. 2012. Learning design for nonlinear dynamical movement systems. The Open Sports Sciences Journal 5 (Suppl. 1): 9–16. Scholar
  17. Davids, K., C. Button, and S.J. Bennett. 2008. Coordination and control of movement in sport: An ecological approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
  18. Davids, K., R. Hristovski, D. Araújo, N. Balague Serre, C. Button, and P. Passos. 2013. Complex systems in sport. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Draheim, C. 2016. Krav Maga—Effektive Selbstverteidigung [Krav maga—effective self-defence]. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.Google Scholar
  20. Edelman, G.M., and J.A. Gally. 2001. Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 98: 13763–13768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elger, C.E., A.D. Friederici, C. Koch, H. Luhmann, C. von der Malsburg, R. Menzel, H. Monyer, F. Rösler, G. Roth, H. Scheich, and W. Singer. 2007. Das Manifest. Gegenwart und Zukunft der Hirnforschung [The manifest: Present and future of brain research]. In Wer erklärt den Menschen? Hirnforscher, Psychologen und Philosophen im Dialog, ed. C. Könnecker, 77–84. Frankfurt: S. Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Goldstein, W.M. 2006. Introduction to Brunswikian theory and method. In Adaptive perspectives on human–technology interaction, ed. A. Kirlik, 10–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Grossman, D., and L.W. Christensen. 2008. On combat. The psychology and physiology of deadly conflict in war and peace. Mascoutah, IL: Warrior Science Publication.Google Scholar
  24. Handy, C. 2002. The age of unreason: New thinking for a new world. London: Random House Business.Google Scholar
  25. Heil, V., M.S. Staller, and S. Körner. 2017. Motive in der Selbstverteidigung—Eine qualitative und quantitative Studie am Beispiel Krav Maga und Wing Chun [Motives in self-defence—A qualitative and quantitative study on krav maga and wing chun]. In Martial Arts and Society. Die gesellschaftliche Bedeutung von Kampfkunst und Kampfsport, ed. S. Körner, and L. Istas. Hamburg: Czwalina.Google Scholar
  26. Hopper, T., J. Butler, and B. Storey (eds.). 2009. TGfU-Simply good pedagogy: Understanding a complex challenge. Ottawa, ON: PHE-Canada.Google Scholar
  27. Jäger, J., T. Klatt, and T. Bliesener. 2013. NRW-Studie: Gewalt gegen Polizeibeamtinnen und Polizeibeamte [North Rhine-Westphalian study: Violence against police officers]. Kiel: Institut für Psychologie, Christian-Albrechts-Universität.Google Scholar
  28. Jensen, P.R., and C.A. Wrisberg. 2014. Performance under acute stress: A qualitative study of soldiers’ experiences of hand-to-hand combat. International Journal of Stress Management 21 (4): 406–423. Scholar
  29. Körner, S. 2008. Dicke Kinder revisited. Zur Kommunikation juveniler Körperkrisen [Fat kids revisited: Communication of juvenile body crisis]. Bielefeld: Transcript.Google Scholar
  30. Körner, S. 2015. Reflexive Mechanismen und Sportwissenschaft [Reflexive mechnisms and sport science]. In Reflexive Sportwissenschaft—Konzepte und Fallanalysen, ed. S. Körner, and V. Schürmann, 129–144. Berlin: Lehmanns.Google Scholar
  31. Körner, S., and M.S. Staller. 2017. Pädagogik und Polizei?! Zur Professionalisierung polizeilichen Einsatztrainings [Pedagogy and police?! The professionalization of police use of force training]. Impulse 22 (1): 34–39.Google Scholar
  32. Luhmann, N. 1996. Social systems. Stanford: University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Milazzo, N., D. Farrow, and J.F. Fournier. 2016. Effect of implicit perceptual-motor training on decision-making skills and underpinning gaze behavior in combat Athletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills 123 (1): 300–323. Scholar
  34. Miller, R. 2011. Facing violence: Preparing for the unexpected. Wolfeboro, NH: YMAA Publication Center.Google Scholar
  35. Moy, B., I. Renshaw, K. Davids, and E. Brymer. 2015. Overcoming acculturation: Physical education recruits’ experiences of an alternative pedagogical approach to games teaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 21 (4): 386–406. Scholar
  36. Pinder, R.A., K. Davids, I. Renshaw, and D. Araújo. 2011a. Manipulating informational constraints shapes movement reorganization in interceptive actions. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 73 (4): 1242–1254. Scholar
  37. Pinder, R.A., K. Davids, I. Renshaw, and D. Araújo. 2011b. Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. Journal of Sport & Excercise Psychology 33: 146–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pinder, R.A., J. Headrick, and R.R.D. Oudejans. 2015. Issues and challenges in developing representative tasks in sport. In The Routledge handbook of sports and expertise, ed. Joseph Baker, and Damian Farrow, 269–281. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Renden, P.G., A. Nieuwenhuys, G.J.P. Savelsbergh, and R.R.D. Oudejans. 2015. Dutch police officers’ preparation and performance of their arrest and self-defence skills: A questionnaire study. Applied Ergonomics 49: 8–17. Scholar
  40. Renden, P.G., G.J.P. Savelsbergh, and R.R.D. Oudejans. 2016. Effects of reflex-based self-defence training on police performance in simulated high-pressure arrest situations. Ergonomics 60 (5): 669–679. Scholar
  41. Ryan, R.M., and E.L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55 (1): 68–78. Scholar
  42. Schöllhorn, W.I. 2016. Invited commentary: Differential learning is different from contextual interference learning. Human Movement Science. Scholar
  43. Schöllhorn, W.I., A. Eekhoff, and P. Hegen. 2015. System dynamics and differential learning. Sportwissenschaft 45 (3): 127–137. Scholar
  44. Selvam, A.M. 2017. Self-organized criticality and predictability in atmospheric flows: The quantum world of clouds and rain. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Simon, F.B. 2015. Einführung in Systemtheorie und Konstruktivismus [Introduction in system theory and constructivims]. Heidelberg: Carl Auer.Google Scholar
  46. Singer, W., and M. Ricard. 2017. Jenseits des Selbst: Dialoge zwischen einem Hirnforscher und einem buddhistischen Mönch [Beyond self: Dialogues between a brain researcher and a buddhistic monk]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  47. Staller, M.S., O. Bertram, P. Althaus, V. Heil, and I. Klemmer. 2016. Selbstverteidigung in Deutschland—Eine empirische Studie zu trainingsdidaktischen Aspekten von 103 Selbstverteidigungssystemen [Self-defence in Germany—A empirical study of pedagogical aspects in 103 self-defence systems]. In Martial arts studies in Germany—Defining and crossing disciplinary boundaries, ed. M.J. Meyer, 51–56. Hamburg: Czwalina.Google Scholar
  48. Staller, M.S., A. Abraham, J. Poolton, and S. Körner. 2017a. It’s not about the pain—it’s about the feedback’: Krav maga experts’ views on self-defense performance and the experience of contact, pain and injury in the process of skill development. Archives of Budo 13: 35–49.Google Scholar
  49. Staller, M.S., O. Bertram, and S. Körner. 2017b. Weapon system selection in police use-of-force training: Value to skill transfer categorization matrix. Salus Journal—A Journal of Law Enforcement, National Security, and Emergency Management 5 (2): 1–15.Google Scholar
  50. Staller, M.S., B. Zaiser, and S. Körner. 2017c. From realism to representativeness: Changing terminology to investigate in self-defense. Martial Arts Studies 4: 70–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Staller, M.S., B. Zaiser, and S. Körner. 2017d. Unverletzt besser werden: Repräsentative Simulationen im polizeilichen Einsatztraining [Getting better without injuries: Representative simulations in police use of force training]. Polizei & Wissenschaft 2: 13–27.Google Scholar
  52. von Foerster, H. 1997. Abbau und Aufbau [Deconstruction and construction]. In Lebende Systeme. Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen in der systemischen Therapie, ed. F.B. Simon, 32–51. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  53. Wulf, G. 2007. Attention and motor skill learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Pedagogy and PhilosophyGerman Sport University CologneCologneGermany
  2. 2.Tactical Decision Making Research Group, Department of Psychological SciencesUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Carnegie Faculty, Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and LeisureLeeds Beckett UniversityLeedsUK
  4. 4.Institute for Professional Conflict ManagementWiesbadenGermany

Personalised recommendations