Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies,positive affect,and motor learning

ObjectivesAccording to the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016), autonomy support contributes to successful performance and learning in part by enhancing learners' expectancies. The present study was designed to test expectancy-related predictions. Specifically, we examined the effects of practice with autonomy support on learners’ self-efficacy, positive affect, and thoughts during practice.DesignExperimental study with two groups. Movement form was assessed in two different experimental phases, supplemented by questionnaire data.MethodTen-year old children were shown a sequence of 5 ballet positions they were asked to learn: Preparatory position, demi plié, tendu with arms and legs in second position, passé with arms in first position, and elevé with feet in first position. In the autonomy-support (AS) group, participants were able to choose video demonstrations throughout practice, while control (C) group participants were provided with demonstrations based on their yoked counterparts’ choices. One day after practice, participants performed in a retention test.ResultsThe AS group demonstrated greater improvements in movement form during practice and enhanced learning relative to the C group. Furthermore, AS participants had higher self-efficacy and greater positive affect than the C group. Also, AS participants reported having more positive thoughts during practice relative to C group participants, who reported more negative and self-related thoughts.ConclusionsThe present findings are in line with OPTIMAL theory predictions. They highlight the motivational underpinnings of the learning benefits that are seen when learners are given choices.     

Self-controlled practice: Autonomy protects perceptions of competence and enhances motor learning

ObjectiveIn previous self-controlled feedback studies, it was observed that participants who could control their own feedback schedules usually use a strategy of choosing feedback after successful trials, and present superior motor learning when compared with participants who were not allowed to choose. Yoked participants of these studies, however, were thwarted not only regarding autonomy but also, presumably, regarding perceived competence, as their feedback schedules were provided randomly, regarding good or bad trials. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether self-controlled feedback schedules would have differential effects on learning if yoked participants are provided with feedback after good trials at the same rate as their self-controlled counterparts.DesignExperimental study with two groups. Timing accuracy was assessed in two different experimental phases, supplemented by questionnaire data.MethodParticipants practiced a coincident-anticipation timing task with a self-controlled or yoked feedback schedule during practice. Participants of the self-controlled group were able to ask for feedback for two trials, after each of five 6-trial practice blocks. Yoked participants received a feedback schedule matching the self-control group schedule, according to accuracy.ResultsParticipants asked for (self-controlled group) and received (yoked group) feedback, mainly after relatively good trials. However, participants of the self-controlled group reported greater self-efficacy at the end of practice, and performed with greater accuracy one day later, on the retention test, than the yoked group.ConclusionsThe findings indicate that the autonomy provided by self-controlled feedback protocols can raise learners' perceptions of competence, with positive consequences on motor learning.     

Self-Controlled Practice to Achieve Neuro-Cognitive Engagement: Underlying Brain Processes to Enhance Cognitive-Motor Learning and Performance

Abstract

While self-controlled practice has been shown to be an effective practice methodology, the neuro-cognitive correlates of its effectiveness are unclear. We investigated whether learners participating in self-controlled practice exhibit increased neuro-cognitive engagement compared to externally controlled practice. Two groups (self-controlled and yoked) of 16 participants practiced and performed a golf putting task over 3 days. Working memory engagement, central executive activity, and cortical activation were assessed via electroencephalography as indicators of neuro-cognitive engagement. The self-controlled group exhibited more consistent working memory engagement, and greater central executive activity, compared to the yoked group during practice. Relationships were also observed between neuro-cognitive engagement during self-controlled practice and performance improvement, indicating that self-controlled practice uniquely benefitted from increased neuro-cognitive engagement.     

Now you see me,now you don’t: Adapting practice through target exclusion negatively impacts motor learning

How to optimize practice through scheduling of different task components or skills is a question that has received a lot of attention in motor learning research. Consistently, schedules with high variability in the order that skills are practiced elicit better learning outcomes than schedules with low variability. Another idea is that learners should seek to reduce the uncertainty of practice outcomes, by avoiding well-learned, low error components in acquisition. To test this idea, we used a target exclusion method to prevent learners from returning to task components with low error and studied how individuals given choice over practice choose to allocate time to components of varying difficulty. In a multi-target adaptation paradigm, we compared exclusion with no exclusion methods in random-schedule, self-control and yoked, matched-schedule groups (6 groups total). To manipulate uncertainty, we excluded targets from practice once participants attained a criterion error score (mean < 5^o) from the last 5 trials to the same target. Contrary to our predictions, groups that practiced without target exclusion were more accurate in retention compared to exclusion groups; irrespective of practice schedule. Self-control groups adopted uncertainty-based practice, spending more time at difficult targets and less time at easier targets. However, there were no group differences in error, based on schedule-type (random, self-control and yoked). In conclusion, target exclusion was not an effective method for learning and did not support the efficacy of uncertainty-based practice for learning novel skills. There were benefits from keeping easier/low error skills in practice for later retention. These benefits did not appear to be related to the increased switching between skills, but could be related to increased task engagement and more optimal challenge associated with practice on a range of target difficulties, rather than the most difficult.     

OPTIMAL practice conditions enhance the benefits of gradually increasing error opportunities on retention of a stepping sequence task

IntroductionPhysical therapists should implement practice conditions that promote motor skill learning after neurological injury. Errorful and errorless practice conditions are effective for different populations and tasks. Errorful learning provides opportunities for learners to make task-relevant choices. Enhancing learner autonomy through choice opportunities is a key component of the Optimizing Performance through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) theory of motor learning. The objective of this study was to evaluate the interaction between error opportunity frequency and OPTIMAL (autonomy-supportive) practice conditions during stepping sequence acquisition in a virtual environment.MethodsForty healthy young adults were randomized to autonomy-supportive or autonomy-controlling practice conditions, which differed in instructional language, focus of attention (external vs internal) and positive versus negative nature of verbal and visual feedback. All participants practiced 40 trials of 4, six-step stepping sequences in a random order. Each of the 4 sequences offered different amounts of choice opportunities about the next step via visual cue presentation (4 choices; 1 choice; gradually increasing [1-2-3-4] choices, and gradually decreasing [4-3-2-1] choices). Motivation and engagement were measured by the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) and the User Engagement Scale (UES). Participants returned 1–3 days later for retention tests, where learning was measured by time to complete each sequence. No choice cues were offered on retention.ResultsParticipants in the autonomy-supportive group outperformed the autonomy-controlling group at retention on all sequences (mean difference 2.88s, p < .005, t[6835] = 3.42). Participants in both groups had the most difficulty acquiring the decreasing choice (4-3-2-1) sequence (p < .001, t[6835] = −4.26) and performed most poorly on the errorful (4 choice) sequence (p < .034, t[6835] = 2.65) at retention. Participants in the autonomy-supportive group performed best at retention on the increasing choice (1-2-3-4) sequence (p < .033, t[6835] = −2.7). Participants in both groups who reported greater attention to the task on the UES Average Focused Attention subscale during acquisition had poorer retention performance, particularly for the decreasing choice (4-3-2-1) sequence (p < .005, t(6835) = 3.39). Participants in the autonomy-supportive group reported significantly higher overall motivation (p = .007, t(38) = 0.728, d = 0.248) on the IMI as compared to the autonomy-controlling group.ConclusionIndividual benefits of errorless learning and autonomy-supportive practice conditions, with an interaction effect for practice that begins errorless but adds increasing error opportunities over time, suggest that participants relied on implicit learning strategies for this full body task and that feedback about successes minimized errors and reduced their potential information-processing benefits. Subsequent work will continue to examine how assigning a positive versus a negative quality to error provision influences the benefits of errorful learning in a variety of tasks.     

Impacts of autonomy-supportive versus controlling instructional language on motor learning

The authors examined the influence of autonomy-supportive (ASL), controlling (CL), and neutral instructional language (NL) on motor skill learning (cricket bowling action). Prior to and several times during the practice phase, participants watched the same video demonstration of the bowling action but with different voice-over instructions. The instructions were designed to provide the same technical information but to vary in terms of the degree of choice performers would perceive when executing the task. In addition to measurements of throwing accuracy (i.e., deviation from the target), perceived choice, self-efficacy, and positive and negative affect were assessed at the end of the practice phase and after a retention test without demonstrations and instructions on Day 2. ASL resulted in perceptions of greater choice, higher self-efficacy, and more positive affect during practice than CL, and enhanced learning as demonstrated by retention test performance. Thus, granting learners autonomy appeared to endow them with confidence in their ability, diminished needs for control of negative emotional responses, and created more positive affect, which may help consolidate motor memories.     

Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children

ObjectivesThe present study investigated the influence of social-comparative feedback on the learning of a throwing task in 10-year-old children.DesignTwo-group experimental design, including a practice phase and retention test.MethodBoth groups of participants, a positive social-comparative feedback and a control group, received veridical feedback about their performance (accuracy score) after each practice trial. In addition, after each block of 10 trials, the positive feedback group was given bogus feedback suggesting that their own performance was better than that of a peer group's on that block. One day after the practice phase, a retention test without (veridical or social-comparative) feedback was performed to assess learning effects as a function of feedback.ResultsThe positive feedback group demonstrated greater throwing accuracy than the control group on the retention test. In addition, questionnaire results indicated that this group scored higher in terms of perceived competence than the control group.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrate that feedback can have an important motivational function that affects the learning of motor skills in children.     

Self-control of feedback during motor learning: accounting for the absolute amount of feedback using a yoked group with self-control over feedback

A traditional control group yoked to a group that self-controls their reception of feedback receives feedback in the same relative and absolute manner. This traditional control group typically does not learn the task as well as the self-control group. Although the groups are matched for the amount of feedback they receive, the information is provided on trials in which the individual may not request feedback if he or she were provided the opportunity. Similarly, individuals may not receive feedback on trials for which it would be a beneficial learning experience. Subsequently, the mismatch between the provision of feedback and the potential learning opportunity leads to a decrement in retention. The present study was designed to examine motor learning for a yoked group with the same absolute amount of feedback, but who could self-control when they received feedback. Increased mental processing of error detection and correction was expected for the participants in the yoked self-control group because of their choice to employ a limited resource in the form of a decreasing amount of feedback opportunities. Participants in the yoked with self-control group committed fewer errors than the self-control group in retention and the traditional yoked group in both the retention and time transfer blocks. The results suggest that the yoked with self-control group was able to produce efficient learning effects and can be a viable control group for further motor learning studies.     

Practice variability promotes an external focus of attention and enhances motor skill learning

Variability in practice has been shown to enhance motor skill learning. Benefits of practice variability have been attributed to motor schema formation (variable versus constant practice), or more effortful information processing (random versus blocked practice). We hypothesized that, among other mechanisms, greater practice variability might promote an external focus of attention on the intended movement effect, while less variability would be more conducive to a less effective internal focus on body movements. In Experiment 1, the learning of a throwing task was enhanced by variable versus constant practice, and variable group participants reported focusing more on the distance to the target (external focus), while constant group participants focused more on their posture (internal focus). In Experiment 2, golf putting was learned more effectively with a random compared with a blocked practice schedule. Furthermore, random group learners reported using a more effective distal external focus (i.e., distance to the target) to a greater extent, whereas blocked group participants used a less effective proximal focus (i.e., putter) more often. While attentional focus was assessed through questionnaires in the first two experiments, learners in Experiment 3 were asked to report their current attentional focus at any time during practice. Again, the learning of a throwing task was more effective after random relative to blocked practice. Also, random practice learners reported using more external focus cues, while in blocked practice participants used more internal focus cues. The findings suggest that the attentional foci induced by different practice schedules might be at least partially responsible for the learning differences.     

The effects of autonomous difficulty selection on engagement,motivation, and learning in a motion-controlled video game task

This experiment investigated the relationship between motivation, engagement, and learning in a video game task. Previous studies have shown increased autonomy during practice leads to superior retention of motor skills, but it is not clear why this benefit occurs. Some studies suggest this benefit arises from increased motivation during practice; others suggest the benefit arises from better information processing. Sixty novice participants were randomly assigned to a self-controlled group, who chose the progression of difficulty during practice, or to a yoked group, who experienced the same difficulty progression but did not have choice. At the end of practice, participants completed surveys measuring intrinsic motivation and engagement. One week later, participants returned for a series of retention tests at three different difficulty levels. RM-ANCOVA (controlling for pre-test) showed that the self-controlled group had improved retention compared to the yoked group, on average, β = 46.78, 95% CI = [2.68, 90.87], p = 0.04, but this difference was only statistically significant on the moderate difficulty post-test (p = 0.004). The self-controlled group also showed greater intrinsic motivation during practice, t(58) = 2.61, p = 0.01. However, there was no evidence that individual differences in engagement (p = 0.20) or motivation (p = 0.87) were associated with learning, which was the relationship this experiment was powered to detect. These data are inconsistent with strictly motivational accounts of how autonomy benefits learning, instead suggesting the benefits of autonomy may be mediated through other mechanisms. For instance, within the information processing framework, the learning benefits may emerge from learners appropriately adjusting difficulty to maintain an appropriate level of challenge (i.e., maintaining the relationship between task demands and cognitive resources).     

Lassoing Skill Through Learner Choice

The authors examined several issues related to the motor learning benefits resulting from giving learners choices. In 2 experiments, participants practiced a novel task, throwing a lasso. In Experiment 1, giving learners a choice ostensibly irrelevant to performance (color of mat under target) resulted in enhanced learning relative to a control group. The choice group also reported more positive affect. Experiment 2 compared the effectiveness of task-irrelevant (mat color) versus task-relevant (video demonstrations of the skill) choices. In both choice groups, each participant was yoked to a participant in the other group, and each received the same mat color or saw the video demonstration, respectively, as chosen by their counterpart in the other group. In the control group, participants were yoked to their respective counterparts in each of the choice groups. On a retention test, the 2 choice groups did not differ from each other, but both outperformed the control group. The affective and learning effects seen when learners are given choices, and the fact that task-relevant and task-irrelevant choices resulted in similar learning benefits, are consistent with a content-neutral mechanism for the effects of choice on learning, as described in the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf &; Lewthwaite, 2016 Wulf, G., &; Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin &; Review, 23, 1382–1414. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).     

Role of Constant,Random and Blocked Practice in an Electromyography-Based Oral Motor Learning Task

Purpose: The role of principles of motor learning (PMLs) in speech has received much attention in the past decade. Oral motor learning, however, has not received similar consideration. This study evaluated the role of three practice conditions in an oral motor tracking task.

Method: Forty-five healthy adult participants were randomly and equally assigned to one of three practice conditions (constant, blocked, and random) and participated in an electromyography-based task. The study consisted of four sessions, at one session a day for four consecutive days. The first three days sessions included a practice phase, with immediate visual feedback, and an immediate retention phase, without visual feedback. The fourth session did not include practice, but only delayed retention testing, lasting 10–15 minutes, without visual feedback.

Results: Random group participants performed better than participants in constant and blocked practice conditions on all the four days. Constant group participants demonstrated superior learning over blocked group participants only on day 4.

Conclusion: Findings indicate that random practice facilitates oral motor learning, which is in line with limb/speech motor learning literature. Future research should systematically investigate the outcomes of random practice as a function of different oral and speech-based tasks.     

Does learning a skill with the expectation of teaching it impair the skill’s execution under psychological pressure if the skill is learned with analogy instructions?

ObjectiveHaving learners practice a motor skill with the expectation of teaching it (versus an expectation of being tested on it) has been revealed to enhance skill learning. However, this improvement in skill performance is lost when the skill must be performed under psychological pressure due to ‘choking under pressure.’ The present study investigated whether this choking effect is caused by an accrual of declarative knowledge during skill practice and could be prevented if a technique (analogy instructions) to minimize the accrual of declarative knowledge during practice is employed.DesignWe used a 2 (Expectation: teach/test) x 2 (Instructions: analogy/explicit) x 2 (Posttest: low-pressure/high-pressure) mixed-factor design, with repeated measures on the last factor.MethodsOne-hundred fifty-six participants were quasi-randomly assigned (based on sex) to one of four groups. Participants in the teach/analogy and teach/explicit groups practiced golf putting with the expectation of teaching putting to another participant, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. Participants in the test/analogy and test/explicit groups practiced golf putting with the expectation of being tested on their putting, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. The next day all participants completed low- and high-pressure putting posttests, with their putting accuracy serving as the dependent variable.ResultsWe observed an Expectation x Instructions × Posttest interaction, such that a main effect of expectation was found in the low-pressure posttest, with the teach group exhibiting superior accuracy, and an Expectation × Instructions interaction was revealed for the high-pressure posttest. This interaction resulted from the teach group showing greater accuracy than the test group exclusively when receiving analogy instructions.ConclusionResults show that participants who practiced with the expectation of teaching exhibited superior learning and indicate that they choked under pressure likely due to their accrual of declarative knowledge during practice, since the choking effect was prevented by having them practice with analogy instructions. Accordingly, having learners practice with the expectation of teaching and techniques that minimize the accrual of declarative knowledge is recommended.     

Conceptions of Ability Affect Motor Learning

ABSTRACT

The authors examined the effects of induced conceptions of ability on motor learning. Participants in 3 groups practiced a balance task after receiving instructions suggesting that the task would reflect an inherent ability (IA group), represent an acquirable skill (AS group), or no ability-related instructions (control group). Across 2 days of practice, the AS and IA groups showed greater improvement in performance compared with the control group. For the retention test on Day 3, the AS group tended to demonstrate generally more effective balance performance than the control group and increasingly greater effectiveness compared with the IA group. Moreover, AS group participants made higher-frequency (reflexive) movement adjustments than participants of the other 2 groups, indicating a greater automaticity in the control of their movements. Thus, learning was enhanced by instructions portraying the task as a learnable skill, rather than revealing a fixed inherent capacity or no instructions (control group).     

The influence of attentional focus on the development of skill representation in a complex action

ObjectivesRecent research has indicated that performers' mental representation of a motor skill changes over the course of learning. In the present study, we sought to ascertain whether the type of instructions (instructions that emphasize either an internal or external focus of attention) influences the development of skill representation during motor learning.DesignParticipants without golf experience were recruited to practice a golf putting task over the course of three training days. Participants were randomly assigned to either an internal focus (focus on the swing of the arms; n = 10) or external focus (focus on the speed of the ball roll; n = 10) learning group. Changes in putting performance and mental representation structure were assessed over the course of learning, as well as during a follow-up retention test two days after practice.MethodsMental representation structure was measured employing the structural dimensional analysis of mental representations (SDA-M), which provided psychometric data on the structure of the mental representation in long-term memory. Additionally, the change in putting accuracy and consistency was recorded over the course of learning.ResultsFindings indicated that the external focus group performed with greater accuracy and consistency during training, and revealed a larger degree of development in their mental representation of the putting task.ConclusionsOverall, our findings suggest that facilitating the link between an action and its effect by means of an external focus is crucial for motor performance as well as the development of skill representation.     

Evidence for the effectiveness of holistic process goals for learning and performance under pressure

ObjectivesResearch has suggested that holistic process goals might help avoid the effects associated with conscious processing of task relevant information by skilled but anxious athletes. This experiment compared the efficacy of holistic and part process goal strategies for novices using a learning paradigm.DesignLaboratory-based experimental design incorporating practice, retention and transfer phases.MethodTwenty-four males were randomly assigned to a part process goal, holistic process goal or control condition and performed a simulated race-driving task in practice, retention and transfer tests.ResultsAnalyses of variance revealed that performance during practice was similar in all conditions but that the holistic process goal group outperformed the part process goal group at both retention and transfer.ConclusionsCompared to part process goals, holistic process goals result in more effective motor learning and performance that appears to be more robust under pressure.     

Does learning a skill with the expectation of teaching it impair the skill’s execution under psychological pressure if the skill is learned with analogy instructions?

ObjectiveHaving learners practice a motor skill with the expectation of teaching it (versus an expectation of being tested on it) has been revealed to enhance skill learning. However, this improvement in skill performance is lost when the skill must be performed under psychological pressure due to ‘choking under pressure.’ The present study will investigate whether this choking effect is caused by an accrual of declarative knowledge during skill practice and could be prevented if a technique (analogy instructions) to minimize the accrual of declarative knowledge during practice is employed.DesignWe will use a 2 (Expectation: teach/test) x 2 (Instruction: analogy/explicit) x 2 (Posttest: high-pressure/low-pressure) mixed-factor design, with repeated measures on the last factor.MethodsA minimum of 148 participants will be quasi-randomly assigned (based on sex) to one of four groups. Participants in the teach/analogy and teach/explicit groups will practice golf putting with the expectation of teaching putting to another participant, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. Participants in the test/analogy and test/explicit groups will practice golf putting with the expectation of being tested on their putting, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. The next day all participants will complete low- and high-pressure putting posttests, with their putting accuracy serving as the dependent variable.     

Different task success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not improve golf putting performance

This study examined how providing different criteria for success affected perceived expectations of success, performance, and learning in a golf-putting task. Twenty-nine physical education students were divided into three experimental groups: (a) a large-circle (LC) group that practiced 10 blocks of five putts, each with a 40 cm diameter circle around the target; (b) a small circle (SC) group that practiced with a 10 cm diameter circle around the target; and (c) a control (C) group that practiced with a 25 cm diameter circle around the target. Forty-eight hours after practice, the participants performed a retention test and a transfer test with a 25 cm diameter circle. The transfer test included putting from a greater distance and from a different angle. Throughout the study, we asked the participants to tell us what they think their chances are to land 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 balls out of 5 possible balls in each block. There were four main findings: (a) the SC group had lower expectancies of success compared with the LC and C groups in acquisition; (b) there were no group differences in performance or learning among groups; (c) golf club kinematic parameters worsened in the transfer test; and (d) the LC group reduced their expectancies of success from the retention to the transfer test, but the expectancies of the SC and C groups remained the same. We conclude that changes in success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not affect actual putting performance or learning.     

Not all choices are created equal: Task-relevant choices enhance motor learning compared to task-irrelevant choices

Lewthwaite et al. (2015) reported that the learning benefits of exercising choice (i.e., their self-controlled condition) are not restricted to task-relevant features (e.g., feedback). They found that choosing one’s golf ball color (Exp. 1) or choosing which of two tasks to perform at a later time plus which of two artworks to hang (Exp. 2) resulted in better retention than did being denied these same choices (i.e., yoked condition). The researchers concluded that the learning benefits derived from choice, whether irrelevant or relevant to the to-be-learned task, are predominantly motivational because choice is intrinsically rewarding and satisfies basic psychological needs. However, the absence of a group that made task-relevant choices and the lack of psychological measures significantly weakened their conclusions. Here, we investigated how task-relevant and task-irrelevant choices affect motor-skill learning. Participants practiced a spatiotemporal motor task in either a task-relevant group (choice over feedback schedule), a task-irrelevant group (choice over the color of an arm-wrap plus game selection), or a no-choice group. The results showed significantly greater learning in the task-relevant group than in both the task-irrelevant and no-choice groups, who did not differ significantly. Critically, these learning differences were not attributed to differences in perceptions of competence or autonomy, but instead to superior error-estimation abilities. These results challenge the perspective that motivational influences are the root cause of self-controlled learning advantages. Instead, the findings add to the growing evidence highlighting that the informational value gained from task-relevant choices makes a greater relative contribution to these advantages than motivational influences do.     

Enhancing Training Efficiency and Effectiveness Through the Use of Dyad Training

The authors examined the effect of inserting observation practice and undirected dialog into the rest interval between practice trials on the learning of a complex task (stabilometer). Training protocols in which learners practice in pairs (dyads) result in increases in learning efficiency, but the critical issue is the effect on learning effectiveness. Three groups of participants (n = 12 in each group) practiced maintaining their balance on a stabilometer. One group practiced individually, and the other 2 groups practiced in dyads in which 1 performer practiced the task while the other observed. In the dyad-alternate condition, participants alternated between physical, observational, and dialog practice on each trial, whereas in the dyad-control condition, subjects completed all trials on 1 form of practice (either physical or observational practice) before engaging in the other form. The results indicated that the dyad-alternate group initially performed more poorly but quickly overtook the individual group, and the performance advantage of the dyad-alternate group was maintained on the delayed retention test. When the different forms of practice were performed consecutively, as in the dyad-control group, acquisition and retention performance was generally poorer than when they were alternated. Those results suggest that one can combine the benefits of physical practice, observation, and dialog between learners in an interactive way to produce an effective and efficient learning protocol.