Article: "Your Qualification Score Doesn't Predict Gunfight Performance"

In its article "Your Qualification Score Doesn't Predict Gunfight Performance," Tactical Science digs into the statistics showing the qualification scores don't measure whatever it is that makes you effective in a gunfight. The reason? According to the article:

    The data here and in other places suggest that firearms qualification does not relate to performance in the field. In science terms, firearms qualification is not a valid measure of field shooting performance.

    This is not surprising given that this is a case of far transfer. Meaning that we are practicing something very different from the thing people are expected to do in the field. The research here is very clear and consistent. Far transfer essentially does not exist. Some of my firearms trainer audience is already grumbling, but let me explain.

    In the field, an officer must interact with people, use movement and spacing to keep a tactical advantage, attempt to de-escalate, decide that force is needed, implement that force in a way that is effective and legal, assess the outcome, alter course if needed, and then deal with the aftermath.

    On the range, a trainee hears a timer beep or sees a target turn, and then fires a set number of shots at a piece of paper, which often only vaguely looks like a person, in a certain amount of time. Then they have to swivel their head because maybe the instructor is walking behind them holding up a random number of fingers.

    You should be able to see that while a gun is used in both environments, the perceptual cues that control the use of that gun and the actions surrounding that use are very different. As I have discussed in depth here before, perception and action are so intimately linked that if you change the perceptual cues, you automatically change the action. This means if you are not practicing with cues that are close to the real thing, then the actions you practiced will not show up in the field. 

Although the article is aimed at law enforcement, the conclusions should apply to civilian defenders as well. I don't take the article as saying that you don't need to train or practice on a square range--obviously you need to learn how to handle and use your firearm--but that you also need other training or practice.