New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Learn Faster with Messy Moves

People whose movements are more variable pick up new motor skills more quickly

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Whether learning to write, swing a golf club or play the violin, even the most good-natured students become frustrated by inevitable mistakes. Such off-target actions were thought to reflect neural noise in the parts of the brain controlling movement—something a good dose of practice would stamp out. But a new study, published January 12 in Nature Neuroscience, finds that these inconsistencies are not always obstacles to be overcome but rather key ingredients to learning.

Study participants learned to copy a displayed curved line without seeing what their hand was doing. Initially these lines were off the mark for everyone, but some people produced more erratic curves than others did. During training each curve was scored on how well it copied the target curve. All participants gradually produced more accurate curves over hundreds of trials, but those who started out with the most variability before training attained accurate curves more quickly than individuals who began with little irregularity. Another experiment bolstered this link: when researchers promoted variability in one aspect of a movement by applying a force field that pushed the participants' hand off target, they learned the motion faster.

Bigger fluctuations may reflect a brain exploring the full spectrum of possible actions, which would narrow in on accurate movements more quickly than a restricted search. Study author Maurice Smith, a neuroscientist at Harvard University, suggests profiling a person's range of movements after a stroke to aid their rehabilitation. “You could focus training on the types of tasks they are most likely to learn well, as predicted from their variability,” he says. For the rest of us, the results mean we should try not to get frustrated with wild misses when we are learning a new activity. That clumsiness could be the key to quick improvement.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe