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.     

Effects of normative feedback on motor learning are dependent on the frequency of knowledge of results

Studies on normative feedback have shown superior motor learning outcomes for individuals who believe that they are performing better than others through increased self-efficacy. Nevertheless, the effects of normative feedback were never dissociated from the knowledge of results (KR) provided to the learners which potentially interacts with self-efficacy as well. Thus, we investigated whether the effects of normative feedback on motor learning, associated with self-efficacy, would be dependent on the amount of KR provided. Fifty-six participants were randomly assigned to four experimental groups in terms of KR frequency (100% and 33%) and normative feedback (positive and negative). In the acquisition phase, all groups received the average KR of their performance at the end of each block of trials (True feedback) and a fake KR based on their own performance (but said to be from a group of participants who practiced the same task) (False Feedback). The False Feedback indicated better or worse performance of the participant in comparison to the fake group, depending on their experimental group. Retention tests were performed immediately and after 24 h from the acquisition phase. To measure self-efficacy, a questionnaire on participant's efficacy was applied before the first block, after each block of trials and before the retention tests. The results revealed superiority of positive normative feedback and 100% KR frequency, compared to negative normative feedback and 100% KR frequency in the 24h retention test. No difference was found between the groups with a frequency of 33% of KR (positive and negative). All groups increased self-efficacy during practice, but there was no difference between groups at any stage of the study. We conclude that the effects of normative feedback on motor learning are dependent on the KR frequency. However, they were not associated with self-efficacy.     

The Effect of Erroneous Knowledge of Results on Skill Acquisition when Augmented Information is Redundant

Even though it can be shown that verbal knowledge of results (KR) is redundant with sensory feedback for learning certain motor skills, such findings do not eliminate the possibility that when KR is available it influences underlying learning processes. In order to examine the function of KR more closely, two experiments were designed in which the subjects received conflicting information about their own sensory feedback and the KR presented by the experimenter. In Experiment 1, two erroneous-KR groups, a correct-KR group, and a no-KR group performed 150 practice trials on a simple anticipation timing task and then performed three no-KR retention tests of 30 trials each following intervals of 10 minutes, 1 week, and 1 month. The results supported previous findings that providing correct KR is redundant in anticipation tasks. However, learning was influenced by KR as subjects performed according to the erroneous KR information, thereby ignoring their sensory feedback even after a 1-month interval. In Experiment 2, subjects practised a more complex striking response for the anticipation task for 75 trials and then performed no-KR retention trials either immediately, or 1 day or 1 week later. One of the groups received erroneous KR after 50 practice trials with correct KR. The results confirmed and extended those from Experiment 1, as erroneous KR, even after initial practice with correct KR, influenced retention performance. These results indicate that although KR provides information that is not needed to learn anticipation timing skills, this augmented verbal information is a dominant source of information that influences underlying cognitive processes involved in learning motor skills.     

Effect of Concurrent Visual Feedback Frequency on Postural Control Learning in Adolescents

The purpose was to find better augmented visual feedback frequency (100% or 67%) for learning a balance task in adolescents. Thirty subjects were divided randomly into a control group, and 100% and 67% feedback groups. The three groups performed pretest (3 trials), practice (12 trials), posttest (3 trials) and retention (3 trials, 24 hours later). The reduced feedback group showed lower RMS in the posttest than in the pretest (p = 0.04). The control and reduced feedback groups showed significant lower median frequency in the posttest than in the pretest (p < 0.05). Both feedback groups showed lower values in retention than in the pretest (p < 0.05). Even when the effect of feedback frequency could not be detected in motor learning, 67% of the feedback was recommended for motor adaptation.     

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.     

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 role of movement speed in learning a visuo-manual coordination in children

Summary The aim of the present study was to investigate the processes underlying aiming movements (motor programming and feedback control), and to explore their modification through learning. Two groups of 6- and 9-year-old children were asked to perform a directional aiming task without visual feedback (open-loop situation). After 15 trials (pretest) all subjects were submitted to a practice session which consisted of three series of trials with visual feedback (closed-loop situation). Half of the subjects had to perform the task at maximum speed (programmed movements), while the other half was required to perform slow movements (feedback-controlled movements). After the practice session all subjects were tested again in the openloop situation without time constraints (posttest). The results showed that during the practice session, accuracy was greater than in the two test conditions. It was greater in the case of slow movements than in the case of rapid ones. Moreover, in the case of rapid movements, it did not improve over the three practice series, while it did improve with slow movements. The difference between pre- and posttests showed that both groups improved their accuracy with practice in all conditions, the greatest improvement being obtained with rapid practice movements in 9-year-old children. It is suggested that different types of feedback (on-line and delayed feedback) contribute in varying degrees to the improvement of the aiming movements. However, the rapid movement condition, which requires a greater efficiency of programming, was found to be more effective for learning than the slow movement condition. The age-related differences found in learning suggest that feedback information can be fully integrated into motor programming only after 6 years of age.     

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.     

Specific and varied practice of motor skill

To assess the potential effect of specific and varied practice on the development of motor schema, 64 children in two age groups (8 yr. and 12 yr.) were tested on a simple throwing task at the beginning and end of a 12-wk. physical education program. For the throwing test the children were assigned to either a specificity or a schema group (varied practice). The task was performed without visual feedback, but knowledge of results was given after each trial. Prior to both tests at the criterion target, the specific group was given practice throws using the criterion target distance, whereas the schema group practiced on two other targets. No differences were found between the two groups at the beginning of the program but on the posttest those children receiving a variety of practice on the throwing task performed significantly better than the specific-practice group. Thus it was suggested that a varied practice schedule may facilitate the initial formation of motor schema, and this process may be enhanced by participation in a physical education program.     

Error Feedback Frequency Affects Automaticity But Not Accuracy and Consistency After Extensive Motor Skill Practice

Earlier studies addressed the effects of feedback frequency on movement accuracy and consistency. The authors additionally addressed the effects on motor automatization. High error feedback frequencies may induce attentional control processes and impede motor automatization. In a pre-post design, 42 participants were assigned to 2 groups with different feedback frequencies and practiced an arm movement sequence with 760 trials in 5 sessions. The 100% group practiced with feedback on 3 movement reversals of the sequence after each trial. The 14% group practiced with 14% frequency according to a fading schedule. Only the 14% group showed a decrease in dual-task costs indicating an increase in automaticity. Group differences in movement accuracy and consistency were not evident.     

Retroactive interference and mental practice effects on motor performance: a pilot study

This study examined the effect of similar versus dissimilar retroactive interference on the mental practice effects for performing a novel motor skill. Research has shown that mental practice of a motor task can interfere with learning and performance of the task; however, little is known about how different retroactive interference activities affect mental practice effects. 90 volunteers ages 18 to 51 years (M=26.8, SD=9.6) completed a pre-test and post-test of 10 sets of five trials of a throwing task with the non-preferred hand. In the practice phase, participants mentally practiced the throwing task and then mentally practiced a task that was similar, dissimilar, or completed an unrelated reading task. Performance for all groups improved from pre- to post-test; however, there were no differences in increases for the three groups. The findings suggest that mental practice of similar and dissimilar tasks produced no significant interference in performance.     

Effects of dynamic and isometric motor practice on position control,force control and corticomuscular coherence in preadolescent children

In this study, we investigated the effects of motor practice with an emphasis on either position or force control on motor performance, motor accuracy and variability in preadolescent children. Furthermore, we investigated corticomuscular coherence and potential changes following motor practice.We designed a setup allowing discrete wrist flexions of the non-dominant hand and tested motor accuracy and variability when the task was to generate specific movement endpoints (15–75 deg) or force levels (5–25% MVC). All participants were tested in both tasks at baseline and post motor practice without augmented feedback on performance. Following baseline assessment, participants (44 children aged 9–11 years) were randomly assigned to either position (PC) or force control (FC) motor practice or a resting control group (CON). The PC and FC groups performed four blocks of 40 trials motor practice with augmented feedback on performance.Following practice, improvements in movement accuracy were significantly greater in the PC group compared to the FC and CON groups (p < 0.001). None of the groups displayed changes in force task performance indicating no benefits of force control motor practice and low transfer between tasks (p-values:0.08–0.45). Corticomuscular coherence (C4-FCR) was demonstrated during the hold phase in both tasks with no difference between tasks. Corticomuscular coherence did not change from baseline to post practice in any group. Our findings demonstrate that preadolescent children improve position control following dynamic accuracy motor practice. Contrary to previous findings in adults, preadolescent children displayed smaller or no improvements in force control following isometric motor practice, low transfer between tasks and no changes in corticomuscular coherence.     

Judgments of learning are significantly higher following feedback on relatively good versus relatively poor trials despite no actual learning differences

Studies have consistently shown that prospective metacognitive judgments of learning are often inaccurate because humans mistakenly interpret current performance levels as valid indices of learning. These metacognitive discrepancies are strongly related to conditions of practice. Here, we examined how the type of feedback (after good versus poor trials) received during practice and awareness (aware versus unaware) of this manipulation affected judgments of learning and actual learning. After each six-trial block, participants received feedback on their three best trials or three worst trials and half of the participants were made explicitly aware of the type of feedback they received while the other half were unaware. Judgments of learning were made at the end of each six-trial block and before the 24-h retention test. Results indicated no motor performance differences between groups in practice or retention; however, receiving feedback on relatively good compared to relatively poor trials resulted in significantly higher judgments of learning in practice and retention, irrespective of awareness. These results suggest that KR on relatively good versus relatively poor trials can have dissociable effects on judgments of learning in the absence of actual learning differences, even when participants are made aware of their feedback manipulation.     

Effects of bandwidth feedback on the automatization of an arm movement sequence

We examined the effects of a bandwidth feedback manipulation on motor learning. Effects on movement accuracy, as well as on movement consistency, have been addressed in earlier studies. We have additionally investigated the effects on motor automatization. Because providing error feedback is believed to induce attentional control processes, we suppose that a bandwidth method should facilitate motor automatization. Participants (N = 48) were assigned to four groups: one control group and three intervention groups. Participants of the intervention groups practiced an arm movement sequence with 760 trials. The BW0-Group practiced with 100% frequency of feedback. For the BW10-Group, feedback was provided when the errors were larger than 10°. The YokedBW10-Group participants were matched to the feedback schedule of research twins from the BW10-Group. All groups performed pre-tests and retention tests with a secondary task paradigm to test for automaticity. The BW10-Group indicated a higher degree of automatization compared with the BW0-Group, which did not exhibit a change in automaticity. The comparison of the YokedBW10-Group, which also exhibited automatization, and the BW10-Group leads to the proposal that reduction of quantitative feedback frequency and additional positive feedback are responsible for the bandwidth effect. Differences in movement accuracy and consistency were not evident.     

Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning

This study examined motivational effects of feedback on motor learning. Specifically, we investigated the influence of social-comparative feedback on the learning of a balance task (stabilometer). In addition to veridical feedback (error scores reflecting deviation from the target horizontal platform position) about their own performance after each trial, two groups received false normative information about the “average” score of others on that trial. Average performance scores indicated that the participant's performance was either above (better group) or below (worse group) the average, respectively. A control group received veridical feedback about trial performance without normative feedback. Learning as a function of social-comparative feedback was determined in a retention test without feedback, performed on a third day following two days of practice. Normative feedback affected the learning of the balance task: The better group demonstrated more effective balance performance than both the worse and control groups on the retention test. Furthermore, high-frequency/low-amplitude balance adjustments, indicative of more automatic control of movement, were greater in the better than in the worse group. The control group exhibited more limited learning and less automaticity than both the better and the worse groups. The findings indicate that positive normative feedback had a facilitatory effect on motor learning.     

Motor Learning as a Function of KR Schedule and Characteristics of Task-Intrinsic Feedback

Forty participants (age range = 18–35 years) practiced 1 of 2 versions of an aiming task (with or without spring resistance). Knowledge of results (KR) was provided to them either immediately or after a delay of 2 trials. Immediate KR led to significantly more accurate performance during the 80 trials in acquisition but significantly less accurate performance on a 40-trial retention test given 24 hr after practice. In addition, the spring version of the task was performed significantly less accurately than the no-spring version on the 24-hr retention test. Most important, a significant interaction on the 24-hr retention test revealed that performance of the no-spring version of the task, when KR had been given after a 2-trial delay, was significantly more accurate than performance of the other 3 combinations of task version and KR schedule. The results suggest that KR dependency in motor skill learning is related to familiarity with task-intrinsic feedback in addition to the schedule on which KR is presented.     

Motor learning as a function of KR schedule and characteristics of task-intrinsic feedback

Forty participants (age range = 18-35 years) practiced 1 of 2 versions of an aiming task (with or without spring resistance). Knowledge of results (KR) was provided to them either immediately or after a delay of 2 trials. Immediate KR led to significantly more accurate performance during the 80 trials in acquisition but significantly less accurate performance on a 40-trial retention test given 24 hr after practice. In addition, the spring version of the task was performed significantly less accurately than the no-spring version on the 24-hr retention test. Most important, a significant interaction on the 24-hr retention test revealed that performance of the no-spring version of the task, when KR had been given after a 2-trial delay, was significantly more accurate than performance of the other 3 combinations of task version and KR schedule. The results suggest that KR dependency in motor skill learning is related to familiarity with task-intrinsic feedback in addition to the schedule on which KR is presented.     

Average KR degrades parameter learning

In the present study, the effects of average knowledge of results (KR) about a set of trials on the learning of a spatiotemporal movement pattern were examined. Participants (N = 85) practiced 3 movement patterns with the same relative and absolute timing and the same relative amplitudes but with varied absolute amplitudes. Five groups of participants practiced under 1 of the following 5 conditions: KR after every trial (100% KR); average KR after every 3rd trial (average); average KR after every trial about the last 3 trials (running-average); KR after every 3rd trial (33% KR); and KR after every trial; plus average KR after every 3rd trial (both). Although there were no differences between groups in the learning of the fundamental movement pattern (or generalized motor program), average feedback (average, running-average) clearly degraded subjects' ability to learn to properly parameterize the actions in amplitude.     

The Effect of Practice Schedule on Context-Dependent Learning

It is well established that random practice compared to blocked practice enhances motor learning. Additionally, while information in the environment may be incidental, learning is also enhanced when an individual performs a task within the same environmental context in which the task was originally practiced. This study aimed to disentangle the effects of practice schedule and incidental/environmental context on motor learning. Participants practiced three finger sequences under either a random or blocked practice schedule. Each sequence was associated with specific incidental context (i.e., color and location on the computer screen) during practice. The participants were tested under the conditions when the sequence-context associations remained the same or were changed from that of practice. When the sequence-context association was changed, the participants who practiced under blocked schedule demonstrated greater performance decrement than those who practiced under random schedule. The findings suggested that those participants who practiced under random schedule were more resistant to the change of environmental context.     

Effects of blocked versus random practice by mentally retarded subjects on learning a novel skill

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of different practice conditions on mentally retarded subjects learning a novel task. 20 subjects with a mean IQ of 51.82 were randomly assigned to one of two practice conditions. The first group practiced at three different speeds (60, 30, and 15 rpm) on the pursuit rotor using a block arrangement in which each speed was practiced for five consecutive trials of 20 sec. duration before practicing at the next speed. The second group used random practice performing 15 trials of the pursuit rotor so three speeds were randomly distributed over the 15 trials. Both groups on the next day performed 15 trials of 20 sec. duration on the pursuit rotor at the transfer speed of 45 rpm. Analysis showed no significant differences among practice conditions which provided 10 min. of experience prior to test.