Hybrid is not a dirty word: Commentary on Wade and Kazeck (2017)

The review by Wade presents some provocative arguments on the state of research and hypotheses on the possible cause(s) of developmental coordination disorder (DCD). He contends that degrading of perception-action coupling (i.e., dynamical systems approach) better explains the motor deficits seen in children with DCD than problems in internal modelling (i.e., information processing approach). However, Wade’s assessment lacks an appreciation of how experimental work on DCD has progressed over the past 10–15 years, moving beyond the narrow box-and-arrow models of traditional information processing (IP) theory and into the realm of cognitive neuroscience. Indeed, Wade’s critique overlooks a large body of recent work that would help dispel many of the misgivings that he presents in his paper. The following commentary will highlight what we consider are the main points in defence of the cognitive neuroscientific investigation of DCD. We will also discuss areas of weakness in present theoretical models and how ecological principles gleaned from a dynamical systems approach could inform and enrich our understanding of the underlying cause(s) of DCD going forward.