Contextual interference and augmented feedback: is there an additive effect for motor learning?

Learning to perform a skilled behavior is affected by the context of the practice session and the frequency of augmented feedback. We studied the combined effect of these variables in the acquisition of a ballistic, bi-directional lever movement pattern involving four different target locations as measured by performance in practice, retention, and transfer tests. Augmented feedback was presented in either an every-trial or a faded schedule during random and blocked practice. Consistent with the contextual interference effect, the blocked practice group produced lower errors in acquisition, but the random practice group outperformed the blocked practice group in both retention and transfer. In contrast, faded feedback did not have a beneficial effect on learning and degraded learning when provided during blocked practice. While the results were consistent with previous findings of random and blocked practice, they were not consistent with previous findings of reduced feedback frequencies.     

Contextual Interference in Motor Learning: Dissociated Effects Due to the Nature of Task Variations

The contextual interference effect in motor learning refers to the interference that results from practising a task within the concept of other tasks in a practice session. Several studies have shown that practice under conditions of high contextual interference (i.e. with a random practice order) degrades performance during acquisition trials, compared to low contextual interference conditions (i.e. with a blocked order, where practice is completed on one task before practice on another task is undertaken). In contrast to acquisition performance, random practice usually leads to more effective learning than blocked practice, as measured by retention and transfer tests. One of the hypotheses regarding the effect suggests that a random practice schedule induces more extensive planning operations during practice than a blocked practice condition. If so, then differences between these two conditions should emerge to the degree that the set of tasks requires complete reconstruction of these planning operations on each trial. To address this issue, we compared four groups of subjects: a blocked and random group that practised three timing tasks that shared a common characteristic (same relative timing), and a blocked and random group that practised three tasks that each had different relative timing structures. Subjects practised these tasks on each of two days, with a retention test and two transfer tests that required either a relative timing structure that had been practised previously or had not previously been practised. No random/ blocked differences occurred regardless of the relative timing of the patterns during acquisition or retention. However, for both transfer tests, random practice enhanced learning only for the group that had practised with tasks that each had different relative timing during acquisition. Implications of these results for an explanation of contextual interference are discussed.     

Consistent and Variable Practice Conditions: Effects on Relative and Absolute Timing

The authors conducted the present experiments to resolve the discrepancy between studies in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced by consistent practice conditions and contextual interference experiments in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced more by random practice than by blocked practice. There were 40 participants in Experiment 1 and 48 in Experiment 2. The results of Experiment 1 extended previous findings: The learning of the relative-timing pattern was systematically enhanced by the degree to which the practice conditions promoted movement consistency (constant > blocked > serial > random). Experiment 2 provided evidence that the discrepancy between the relative-timing effects in the 2 groups of studies was a product of the way in which relative-timing goals and feedback were presented. When the feedback was presented as segment times, random practice resulted in generally more stable relative-timing patterns during acquisition than blocked practice did. Thus, in both experiments, the learning of the relative-timing pattern was enhanced by more stable relative-timing conditions during acquisition. Absolute-timing learning, as indexed by the transfer tests, was enhanced by serial or random practice as compared with constant or blocked practice, and was relatively unaffected by feedback conditions directed at the relative-timing pattern. In terms of motor programming theory, those findings are taken as additional evidence for the disassociation of memories supporting generalized motor program (GMP) performance, as indexed by relative timing, and parameter performance, as indexed by absolute timing.     

Consistent and variable practice conditions: effects on relative and absolute timing

The authors conducted the present experiments to resolve the discrepancy between studies in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced by consistent practice conditions and contextual interference experiments in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced more by random practice than by blocked practice. There were 40 participants in Experiment 1 and 48 in Experiment 2. The results of Experiment 1 extended previous findings: The learning of the relative-timing pattern was systematically enhanced by the degree to which the practice conditions promoted movement consistency (constant > blocked > serial > random). Experiment 2 provided evidence that the discrepancy between the relative-timing effects in the 2 groups of studies was a product of the way in which relative-timing goals and feedback were presented. When the feedback was presented as segment times, random practice resulted in generally more stable relative-timing patterns during acquisition than blocked practice did. Thus, in both experiments, the learning of the relative-timing pattern was enhanced by more stable relative-timing conditions during acquisition. Absolute-timing learning, as indexed by the transfer tests, was enhanced by serial or random practice as compared with constant or blocked practice, and was relatively unaffected by feedback conditions directed at the relative-timing pattern. In terms of motor programming theory, those findings are taken as additional evidence for the disassociation of memories supporting generalized motor program (GMP) performance, as indexed by relative timing, and parameter performance, as indexed by absolute timing.     

Variability of Practice and Contextual Interference in Motor Skill Learning

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether learning benefits in multiple-task learning situations are a result of contextual interference or of schema enhancement related to the amount of variability in the practice session. Two experiments were designed that replicated and extended the experiment reported by Wulf and Schmidt (1988). In a 2 (same vs. different relative time) x 2 (blocked vs. random practice schedule) design, 48 right-handed subjects were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions. A tapping task was employed that required a right-handed tap of three small brass plates arranged in a diamond pattern. Each segment had a specific time requirement. Target times and response times were provided on a computer screen directly in front of the subject. Each subject participated in two acquisition sessions (i.e., 198 practice trials) and was tested for learning on several different retention and transfer tests. In Experiment 2, a control group was added that received no acquisition phase. Results of both experiments showed a typical contextual interference effect, with depressed scores by the random groups during acquisition but significantly better scores than the blocked groups on several retention and transfer tests. Certain characteristics of the tests were found to influence the demonstration of the practice schedule effects. These results were consistent with predictions from Magill and Hall (1990) that the learning benefits of contextual interference are more likely to occur when skill variations are from different classes of movement and that the amount of variability in practice is more influential when the to-be-learned tasks are parameter modifications of the same generalized motor program.     

Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention

Expanding retrieval practice (T. K. Landauer & R. A. Bjork, 1978) is regarded as a superior technique for promoting long-term retention relative to equally spaced retrieval practice. In Experiments 1 and 2, the authors found that expanding retrieval practice of vocabulary word pairs produced short-term benefits 10 min after learning, conceptually replicating Landauer and Bjork's results. However, equally spaced retrieval produced superior retention 2 days later. This pattern occurred both with and without feedback after test trials. In Experiment 3, the 1st test occurred immediately or after a brief delay, and repeated tests were expanding or equally spaced. Delaying the first test improved long-term retention, regardless of how the repeated tests were spaced. The important factor for promoting long-term retention is delaying initial retrieval to make it more difficult, as is done in equally spaced retrieval but not in expanding retrieval. Expanding the interval between repeated tests had little effect on long-term retention in 3 experiments.     

学习方式的变革:提取促进学习

提取练习效应是指在学习与最终测验之间,等长时间的提取练习与重复学习相比,前者更能促进长时记忆的保持,也称为测试效应。大量研究表明提取测试是一种高效的学习策略,师生却对此认识不足,认为测试只是检测学习效果的评估工具,并不能改变或促进学习。本文主要从提取练习促进学习的认知神经加工机制、提取练习在实践应用中的特点、提高提取练习效应的方法及其在教学实践中的局限四方面梳理了相关研究,为提取练习广泛应用于教学实践提供支持,同时也为师生正确高效利用这一策略提供了参考,使学生获得更高效和持久的学习。     

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.     

A noted on the relationship between task requirements and the contextual interference effect

Typically, tasks used in past contextual interference experiments had movement, spatial pattern, or timing requirements. The possibility exists that the blocked/random manipulation of only one of these task characteristics contributes to the contextual interference effect. The purpose of the experiment reported here was to test the impact of separate movement and timing tasks on the superior learning of random trained groups. The task for all subjects in the movement condition was to release a start button and knock over a wooden barrier. There were three movement goals to be learned. Half of the subjects in this condition practiced the three movements in a blocked schedule and half practiced them in a random schedule. The subjects in the no-movement condition estimated the same three times by holding down the start button for the appropriate duration. Similarly, these subjects were divided into random and blocked practice groups. All subjects then performed a retention test. Results showed that for the movement condition, the blocked group performed with less error than the random group during acquisition. In retention, however, the random group performed with less error than the blocked group. conversely, for the no-movement condition, there were no differences between the two practice schedule groups during acquisition or during retention for any of the dependent measures. These results indicated that experimental tasks must have some type of movement requirement in order to facilitate learning through the use of random practice schedules.     

Models of performance in learning multisegment movement tasks: consequences for acquisition,retention, and judgments of learning

Participants learned different keystroke patterns, each requiring that a key sequence be struck in a prescribed time. Trials of a given pattern were either blocked or interleaved randomly with trials on the other patterns and before each trial modeled timing information was presented that either matched or mismatched the movement to be executed next. In acquisition, blocked practice and matching models supported better performance than did random practice and mismatching models. In retention, however, random practice and mismatching models were associated with superior learning. Judgments of learning made during practice were more in line with acquisition than with retention performance, providing further evidence that a learner's current ease of access to a motor skill is a poor indicator of learning benefit.     

A Note on the Relationship Between Task Requirements and the Contextual Interference Effect

Typically, tasks used in past contextual interference experiments had movement, spatial pattern, or timing requirements. The possibility exists that the blocked/random manipulation of only one of these task characteristics contributes to the contextual interference effect. The purpose of the experiment reported here was to test the impact of separate movement and timing tasks on the superior learning of random trained groups. The task for all subjects in the movement condition was to release a start button and knock over a wooden barrier. There were three movement time goals to be learned. Half of the subjects in this condition practiced the three movements in a blocked schedule and half practiced them in a random schedule. The subjects in the no-movement condition estimated the same three times by holding down the start button for the appropriate duration. Similarly, these subjects were divided into random and blocked practice groups. All subjects then performed a retention test. Results showed that for the movement condition, the blocked group performed with less error than the random group during acquisition. In retention, however, the random group performed with less error than the blocked group. Conversely, for the no-movement condition, there were no differences between the two practice schedule groups during acquisition or during retention for any of the dependent measures. These results indicate that experimental tasks must have some type of movement requirement in order to facilitate learning through the use of random practice schedules.     

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.     

Reminders can enhance or impair episodic memory updating: a memory-for-change perspective

ABSTRACT

The Memory-for-Change framework proposes that retrieving episodic memories can facilitate new learning when changes between existing memories and new information are integrated during encoding and later recollected. Four experiments examined whether reminders could improve memory updating and enhance new learning. Participants studied two study lists of word pairs and were given a cued recall test on responses from both lists. Reminders of List 1 words pairs (A-B) appeared immediately before List 2 words pairs that included repeated cues and changed responses (A-D). Across experiments, we varied the types of reminders to determine whether differences in their effectiveness as retrieval cues would influence memory for the list membership of responses. We found that presenting intact reminders (cue-response) enhanced the memory benefits associated with recollection-based retrieval of changes relative to when no reminders appeared and when partial reminders (cue-only) appeared with and without feedback. Importantly, cue-response reminders benefitted memory when they were recognised in List 2 and when changes were later recollected. This suggests that integrative encoding can be facilitated when substantial environmental support is available to cue retrieval of existing memories. These findings have practical implications for understanding which reminders best aid the correction of memories for inaccurate information.     

On the cognitive processes underlying contextual interference and observational learning

The main goal of the present study was to determine whether observation of an unskilled model learning a timing task enables the observer to develop a cognitive representation of the task similar to the one acquired through physical practice (Adams, 1986; Bandura, 1977; Lee & White, 1990). To reach that goal, we tested whether a contextual interference effect would be obtained in a retention test of subjects who had observed an individual practicing three variations of a timing task under a random or a blocked schedule of practice. Similar patterns of results in an immediate retention test were found following observation and physical practice. This suggests that observation indeed engaged the observers in the same type of cognitive activities as did physical practice. Moreover, a schedule of practice made up of 100% physical practice led to improved learning compared with a schedule of practice made up of 50% observation followed by 50% physical practice. This suggests that learning is enhanced more by numerous implementations of a motor program than by its mere construction or retrieval.     

Contextual interference effects in sequence learning for young and older adults

Practice of different tasks in a random order induces better retention than practicing them in a blocked order, a phenomenon known as the contextual interference (CI) effect. Our purpose was to investigate whether the CI effect exists in sequence learning, such that practicing different sequences in a random order will result in better learning of sequences than practicing them in blocks, and whether this effect is affected by aging. Subjects practiced a serial reaction time task where a set of three 4-element sequences were arranged in blocks or in a random order on 2 successive days. Subjects were divided into 4 groups based on a 2-GROUP (young or old) by 2-ORDER (random or blocked practice) between-subject design. Three days after practice (Day 5), subjects were tested with practiced and novel sequences to evaluate sequence-specific learning. The results replicate the CI effect in sequence learning in both young and older adults. Older adults retained sequences better when trained in a random condition than in a blocked condition, although the random condition incurs greater task switching costs in older adults during practice. Our study underscores the distinction between age-related effects on learning vs. performance, and offers practical implications for enhancing skill learning in older adults.     

Memory consolidation and contextual interference effects with computer games

Some investigators of the contextual interference effect contend that there is a direct relation between the amount of practice and the contextual interference effect based on the prediction that the improvement in learning tasks in a random practice schedule, compared to a blocked practice schedule, increases in magnitude as the amount of practice during acquisition on the tasks increases. Research using computer games in contextual interference studies has yielded a large effect (f = .50) with a random practice schedule advantage during transfer. These investigations had a total of 36 and 72 acquisition trials, respectively. The present study tested this prediction by having 72 college students, who were randomly assigned to a blocked or random practice schedule, practice 102 trials of three computer-game tasks across three days. After a 24-hr. interval, 6 retention and 5 transfer trials were performed. Dependent variables were time to complete an event in seconds and number of errors. No significant differences were found for retention and transfer. These results are discussed in terms of how the amount of practice, task-related factors, and memory consolidation mediate the contextual interference effect.     

Is expanding retrieval a superior method for learning text materials?

Expanding retrieval practice refers to the idea that gradually increasing the spacing interval between repeated tests ought to promote optimal long-term retention. Belief in the superiority of this technique is widespread, but empirical support is scarce. In addition, virtually all research on expanding retrieval has examined the learning of word pairs in paired-associate tasks. We report two experiments in which we examined the learning of text materials with expanding and equally spaced retrieval practice schedules. Subjects studied brief texts and recalled them in an initial learning phase. We manipulated the spacing of the repeated recall tests and examined final recall 1 week later. Overall we found that (1) repeated testing enhanced retention more than did taking a single test, (2) testing with feedback (restudying the passages) produced better retention than testing without feedback, but most importantly (3) there were no differences between expanding and equally spaced schedules of retrieval practice. Repeated retrieval enhanced long-term retention, but how the repeated tests were spaced did not matter.     

Does Narrative Feedback Enhance Children's Motor Learning in a Virtual Environment?

Augmented feedback has motivational and informational functions in motor learning, and is a key feature of practice in a virtual environment (VE). This study evaluated the impact of narrative (story-based) feedback as compared to standard feedback during practice of a novel task in a VE on typically developing children's motor learning, motivation and engagement. Thirty-eight children practiced navigating through a virtual path, receiving narrative or non-narrative feedback following each trial. All participants improved their performance on retention but not transfer, with no significant differences between groups. Self-reported engagement was associated with acquisition, retention and transfer for both groups. A narrative approach to feedback delivery did not offer an additive benefit; additional affective advantages of augmented feedback for motor learning in VEs should be explored.     

The Influence of Reminder Trials on Contextual Interference Effects

Two experiments investigated the proposition of the elaboration explanation for contextual interference that more than one task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a random schedule but that only one task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a blocked schedule. Three motor tasks were performed as fast as possible in either a random or blocked practice schedule. At the end of practice, a reminder trial for each task was either given or not given. Acquisition performance was slower for the random practice conditions than for the blocked practice conditions. Retention performance was faster for the random practice conditions than for the blocked practice condition that did not receive a reminder trial for each task. Importantly, performance differences were not found between the random practice conditions and the blocked practice condition that did receive a reminder trial for each task. A blocked practice condition with a beneficial acquisition and reminder task order pairing performed faster during both acquisition and retention than a comparable random practice condition. Reminder trials can facilitate detailing of task characteristics, and their effectiveness is determined by the elapsed time and number of intervening tasks during acquisition and retention.     

The influence of reminder trials on contextual interference effects

Two experiments investigated the proposition of the elaboration explanation for contextual interference that more than one task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a random schedule but that only one task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a blocked schedule. Three motor tasks were performed as fast as possible in either a random or blocked practice schedule. At the end of practice, a reminder trial for each task was either given or not given. Acquisition performance was slower for the random practice conditions than for the blocked practice conditions. Retention performance was faster for the random practice conditions than for the blocked practice condition that did not receive a reminder trial for each task. Importantly, performance differences were not found between the random practice conditions and the blocked practice condition that did receive a reminder trial for each task. A blocked practice condition with a beneficial acquisition and reminder task order pairing performed faster during both acquisition and retention than a comparable random practice condition. Reminder trials can facilitate detailing of task characteristics, and their effectiveness is determined by the elapsed time and number of intervening tasks during acquisition and retention.