The Role of Video in Facilitating Perception and Action of a Novel Coordination Movement

Two groups (n = 10 in each) practiced a novel, bimanual coordination pattern that was demonstrated on video. One of the groups received augmented video feedback of their own responses after each trial following a demonstration. The video-feedback group showed better performance in acquisition and retention than the no-feedback group. On error-detection tests, the video-feedback group was better able to distinguish between correct and incorrect movement patterns. The authors concluded that video feedback helps to make relative phase information salient by aiding the discrimination process. Prepractice ability on a scanning task revealed that individuals who persevered with inphase-type movements, even though the task demands dictated otherwise, had the most difficulty determining and subsequently performing the required movement. Video feedback helped them to compensate for those difficulties.     

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.     

Training of efficient oculomotor strategies enhances skill acquisition

The present study investigated the hypothesis that efficient oculomotor behaviours can be acquired through practice on a series of simple tasks and can be transferred subsequently to a complex visuomotor task, such as a video game. Each of two groups of subjects were exposed to a different set of simple tasks, or drills. One group, the efficient eye movement experimental group, received training designed to minimize eye movements and optimize scan path behaviours, whereas a second group of subjects, the inefficient eye movement experimental group, received training designed to increase the frequency of eye movements. Oculomotor training was interspersed with practice on the video game. Performance of these two experimental groups in the video game was compared to a control group playing the video game but receiving no specific training and matched for total time in the experiment. The group receiving efficient oculomotor training exhibited significantly superior performance in the video game and fewer foveations than either the inefficient or control groups, which did not differ from each other. Overall there was a significant inverse correlation between the number of foveations in the game and game score. The results of this study are discussed in terms of their implications for the importance of oculomotor training in the acquisition of any complex perceptual motor task.     

Visual discrimination of delayed self-generated movement reveals the temporal limit of proprioceptive–visual intermodal integration

This study examined the intermodal integration of visual–proprioceptive feedback via a novel visual discrimination task of delayed self-generated movement. Participants performed a goal-oriented task in which visual feedback was available only via delayed videos displayed on two monitors—each with different delay durations. During task performance, delay duration was varied for one of the videos in the pair relative to a standard delay, which was held constant. Participants were required to identify and use the video with the lesser delay to perform the task. Visual discrimination of the lesser-delayed video was examined under four conditions in which the standard delay was increased for each condition. A temporal limit for proprioceptive–visual intermodal integration of 3–5 s was revealed by subjects’ inability to reliably discriminate video pairs.     

Questioning implicit motor learning as instantiated by the pursuit-tracking task

The effect of concurrent visual feedback on the implicit learning of repeated segments in a task of pursuit tracking has been tested. Although this feedback makes it possible to regulate the positional error during the movement, it could also induce negative guidance effects. To test this hypothesis, a first set of participants (N=42) were assigned to two groups, which performed either the standard pursuit-tracking task based on the experimental paradigm of Pew ( 1974 ; group F-ST), or a task called "movement reproduction" in which the feedback was suppressed (group noF-ST). A second set of participants (N=26) performed in the same feedback condition groups but in a dual-task situation (F-DT and noF-DT; Experiment 2). The results appear to confirm our predictions since the participants in groups without feedback, contrary to those in groups with feedback, succeeded with practice in differentiating their performances as a function of the nature of the segments (repeated or nonrepeated) both in simple (Experiment 1) and in dual-task (Experiment 2) situations. These experiments indicate that the feedback in the pursuit-tracking task induces a guidance function potentially resulting in an easiness tracking that prevents the participants from learning the repetition.     

Attention focusing instructions and coordination bias: Implications for learning a novel bimanual task

Four groups learnt a novel bimanual coordination movement pattern under instructions designed to manipulate focus of attention. It was predicted that instructions directing attention onto the effects of the action would facilitate learning. Three groups received demonstrations of the required 90° relative phase movement. Two of the demonstration groups also received instruction directing attention either towards the feedback (EXTERNAL), or the relationship between their arm movements and the feedback (RELATION). The third group received no attention directing instructions (DEMO). A final group was only provided with goal relevant feedback (NO DEMO). A scanning task enabled coordination bias to be assessed pre-practice. This was conducted to ensure task novelty and assign participants equally across groups based on strength of bias to in- and/or anti-phase. Acquisition rate was slower for the DEMO only group, especially compared to the EXTERNAL group. Additionally, participants biased to in-phase (as compared to anti-phase) during the scanning trial also showed high error early in practice. These differences remained in retention. Irrespective of feedback condition the DEMO group evidenced the most error in retention. However, all groups were affected by the removal of on-line feedback, although the attention-directing instructions provided during practice somewhat decreased the negative effects associated with feedback removal. Overall, the in-phase-biased participants were most affected by withdrawal of feedback. It was concluded that movement demonstrations alone do not facilitate learning of a novel coordination task, unless additional goal-directed instruction is provided. Additionally, individual differences in coordination bias pre-practice can be used to predict learning rate and quality.     

The effects of video feedback on running form

Correct running form is important for injury prevention; as such, correct form promotes continued engagement in running as a long-term form of exercise. Researchers have shown video feedback to be an effective strategy to improve athletic form for a variety of sports, but it has not been evaluated in any behavior analytic research as a method for improving running form. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of video feedback to improve running form for regular runners. During baseline, each participant was video recorded while running without any feedback (verbal or video). During intervention, the researcher recorded the participant, then showed them the video and provided feedback on correct or incorrect form, according to a 9-step task analysis. Results show that all three participants achieved 100% correct steps on the task analysis when video feedback was used to maintain their form during follow-up.     

How to improve movement execution in sidestep cutting? Involve me and I will learn

Providing choices, i.e., autonomy, to athletes during practice increases intrinsic motivation and positively influences the motor learning process. The effects of autonomy on the timing of feedback (self-controlled timing of feedback) when optimizing the movement execution of sidestep cutting (SSC), a task that is highly related with ACL injury risk, are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of self-controlled timing of video and EF-feedback on movement execution of SSC in team sport athletes. Thirty healthy ball team sport athletes (22.9 ± 1.7 years, 185.5 ± 7.2 cm, 79.3 ± 9.2 kg) were recruited from local sports clubs. Participants were alternately assigned to the self-control (SC) or the yoked (YK) group based on arrival and performed five anticipated and five unanticipated 45° SSC trials as pre-, immediate-post and one-week retention test. Movement execution was measured with the Cutting Movement Assessment Score (CMAS). Training consisted of three randomized 45° SSC conditions: one anticipated and two unanticipated conditions. All participants received expert video instructions and were instructed to ‘try to do your best in copying the movement of the expert’. The SC group was allowed to request feedback whenever they wanted during training. The feedback consisted of 1) CMAS score, 2) posterior and sagittal videos of the last trial and 3) an external focus verbal cue on how to improve their execution. The participants were told to lower their score and they knew the lower the score, the better. The YK group received feedback after the same trial on which their matched participant in the SC group had requested feedback. Data of twenty-two participants (50% in SC group) was analyzed. Pre-test and training CMAS scores between groups were equal (p > 0.05). In the anticipated condition, the SC group (1.7 ± 0.9) had better CMAS scores than the YK group (2.4 ± 1.1) at the retention test (p < 0.001). Additionally, in the anticipated condition, the SC group showed improved movement execution during immediate-post (2.0 ± 1.1) compared to pre-test (3.0 ± 1.0), which was maintained during retention (p < 0.001). The YK group also improved in the anticipated condition during immediate-post (1.8 ± 1.1) compared to pre-test (2.6 ± 1.0) (p < 0.001) but showed decreased movement execution during retention compared to immediate-post test (p = 0.001). In conclusion, self-controlled timing of feedback resulted in better learning and greater improvements in movement execution compared to the control group in the anticipated condition. Self-controlled timing of feedback seems beneficial in optimizing movement execution in SSC and is advised to be implemented in ACL injury prevention programs.     

Terminal Feedback Outperforms Concurrent Visual,Auditory, and Haptic Feedback in Learning a Complex Rowing-Type Task

Augmented feedback, provided by coaches or displays, is a well-established strategy to accelerate motor learning. Frequent terminal feedback and concurrent feedback have been shown to be detrimental for simple motor task learning but supportive for complex motor task learning. However, conclusions on optimal feedback strategies have been mainly drawn from studies on artificial laboratory tasks with visual feedback only. Therefore, the authors compared the effectiveness of learning a complex, 3-dimensional rowing-type task with either concurrent visual, auditory, or haptic feedback to self-controlled terminal visual feedback. Results revealed that terminal visual feedback was most effective because it emphasized the internalization of task-relevant aspects. In contrast, concurrent feedback fostered the correction of task-irrelevant errors, which hindered learning. The concurrent visual and haptic feedback group performed much better during training with the feedback than in nonfeedback trials. Auditory feedback based on sonification of the movement error was not practical for training the 3-dimensional movement for most participants. Concurrent multimodal feedback in combination with terminal feedback may be most effective, especially if the feedback strategy is adapted to individual preferences and skill level.     

A Comparison of Two References for Using Knowledge of Performance in a Motor Task

In the present study, the learning of a task in which the goal of the movement was not isomorphic with a specific movement pattern was examined. The subjects' (N = 48) goal in the task was to be both spatially and temporally accurate in reaching 4 targets with a right arm lever movement. After each acquisition trial, the displacement profile of the movement just produced was provided to all subjects as knowledge of performance (KP). The relative effectiveness of 2 possible references, with which subjects could compare the KP, was examined. One of the references examined was knowledge of results (KR), which was provided by reporting the total absolute timing and amplitude errors from the 4 targets. The other reference examined was a criterion template (CT), which was defined as the most efficient movement pattern for reaching the 4 targets. In the feedback display, CT was superimposed on the displacement profile of the movement just produced. A factorial design, in which 2 levels of KR (KR, no KR) were crossed with 2 levels of CT (CT, no CT), produced 4 feedback conditions. After 120 acquisition trials with feedback, immediate and delayed retention tests without feedback and a reacquisition test with KR (20 trials per test) were conducted. Acquisition results indicated that KR was a better reference than CT for per-forming the timing aspect of the movement and for producing the generalized motor program (GMP) associated with the most efficient movement pattern. Delayed retention results showed that KR was also a better reference than CT for learning the most efficient GMP. The calibration strategy undertaken by subjects who were provided with KR during acquisition explains the superiority of the KR reference. The calibration strategy is compared with the pattern-matching activity that was probably undertaken by subjects who had received CT as a reference.     

Average KR schedule in learning of timing: influence of length for summary knowledge of results and task complexity

This experiment investigated the influence of length for average Knowledge of Results (KR) and task complexity on learning of timing in a barrier knock-down task. Participants (30 men and 30 women) attempted to press a goal button in 1200 msec. after pressing a start button. The participant was assigned into one of six groups by two tasks (simple and complex) and three feedback groups (100% KR, Average 3, Average 5). The simple and complex tasks required a participant to knock down one or three barriers before pressing a goal button. After a pretest without KR, participants practiced 60 trials of physical practice with one of the three following groups as a practice phase: one given the result of movement time after every trial (100% KR), a second given the average movement time after every third trial (Average 3), a third given the average movement time after every fifth trial (Average 5). Participants then performed a posttest with no-KR and two retention tests, taken 10 min. and 24 hr. after the posttest without KR. Analysis gave several findings. (1) On the complex task, the absolute constant error (/CE/) and the variable error (VE) were less than those on the simple task. (2) The /CE/ and the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 groups were less than those of the Average 5 group in the practice phase, and the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 group were less than those of the Average 5 group on the retention tests. (3) In the practice phase, the /CE/ and the VE on Blocks 1 and 2 were higher than on Blocks 5 and 6. (4) On the retention tests, the /CE/ of the posttest was less than retention tests 1 and 2. And, the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 groups were less than that of the Average 5 group. These results suggest that the average feedback length of three trials and the given feedback information after every trial are advantageous to learning timing on this barrier knock-down task.     

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.     

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.     

Online versus offline processing of visual feedback in the control of movement amplitude

Researchers have suggested that visual feedback not only plays a role in the correction of errors during movement execution but that visual feedback from a completed movement is processed offline to improve programming on upcoming trials. In the present study, we examined the potential contribution of online and offline processing of visual feedback by analysing spatial variability at various kinematic landmarks in the limb trajectory (peak acceleration, peak velocity, peak negative acceleration and movement end). Participants performed a single degree of freedom video aiming task with and without vision of the cursor under four criterion movement times (225, 300, 375 and 450 ms). For movement times of 225 and 300 ms, the full vision condition was less variable than the no vision condition. However, the form of the variability profiles did not differ between visual conditions suggesting that the contribution of visual feedback was due to offline processes. In the 375 and 450 ms conditions, there was evidence for both online and offline control as the form of the variability profiles differed significantly between visual conditions.     

Sensory feedback in the learning of a novel motor task

The role of different forms of feedback is examined in learning a novel motor task. Five groups of ten subjects had to learn the voluntary control of the abduction of the big toe, each under a different feedback condition (proprioceptive feedback, visual feedback, EMG feedback, tactile feedback, force feedback). The task was selected for two reasons. First, in most motor learning studies subjects have to perform simple movements which present hardly any learning problem. Second, studying the learning of a new movement an provide useful information for neuromuscular reeducation, where patients often also have to learn movements for which no control strategy exists. The results show that artificial sensory feedback (EMG feedback, force feedback) is more powerful than "natural" (proprioceptive, visual, and tactile) feedback. The implications of these results for neuromuscular reeducation are discussed.     

Sensory Feedback in the Learning of a Novel Motor Task

The role of different forms of feedback is examined in learning a novel motor task. Five groups of ten subjects had to learn the voluntary control of the abduction of the big toe, each under a different feedback condition (proprioceptive feedback, visual feedback, EMG feedback, tactile feedback, force feedback). The task was selected for two reasons. First, in most motor learning studies subjects have to perform simple movements which present hardly any learning problem. Second, studying the learning of a new movement can provide useful information for neuromuscular reeducation, where patients often also have to learn movements for which no control strategy exists. The results show that artificial sensory feedback (EMG feedback, force feedback) is more powerful than “natural” (proprioceptive, visual, and tactile) feedback. The implications of these results for neuromuscular reeducation are discussed.     

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.     

Effects of generalized self-efficacy and negative social comparison feedback on specific self-efficacy and performance

The effects of social comparison feedback on specific self-efficacy and performance of high generalized self-efficacy participants and low generalized self-efficacy participants were examined with the help of 20 participants with high generalized self-efficacy and 20 participants with low generalized self-efficacy. Half of the participants in each generalized self-efficacy group received negative social comparison feedback after each of four trials of an experimental task while the other half received no feedback. Two kinds of specific self-efficacy-performance-based and normative-based--were measured once before the task and four times after the trials of the task. After the task, the High generalized self-efficacy/Feedback group rated performance-based specific self-efficacy higher and performed better than the Low generalized self-efficacy/Feedback group. No significant difference was observed between the High generalized self-efficacy/No feedback group and Low generalized self-efficacy/No feedback group. There were no significant effects with regard to normative-based specific self-efficacy.     

Instructed Hand Movements Affect Students’ Learning of an Abstract Concept From Video

Producing content-related gestures has been found to impact students’ learning, whether such gestures are spontaneously generated by the learner in the course of problem-solving, or participants are instructed to pose based on experimenter instructions during problem-solving and word learning. Few studies, however, have investigated the effect of (a) performing instructed gestures while learning concepts or (b) producing gestures without there being an implied connection between the gestures and the concepts being learned. The two studies reported here investigate the impact of instructed hand movements on students’ subsequent understanding of a concept. Students were asked to watch an instructional video—focused on the concept of statistical model—three times. Two experimental groups were given a secondary task to perform while watching the video, which involved moving their hands to mimic the placement and orientation of red rectangular bars overlaid on the video. Students were told that the focus of the study was multitasking, and that the instructed hand movements were unrelated to the material being learned. In the content-match group the placement of the hands reinforced the concept being explained, and in the content-mismatch group it did not. A control group was not asked to perform a secondary task. In both studies, findings indicate that students in the content-match group performed better on the posttest, and showed less variation in performance, than did students in the content-mismatch group, with control students falling in between. Instructed hand movement—even when presented as an unrelated, secondary task—can affect students’ learning of a complex concept.     

Vision,proprioception and corollary discharge in a movement recall test

Movement recall was investigated in relation to the sensory processes involved in a triangle drawing task.Forty subjects in two groups, one with and one without visual feedback, performed a recall task involving movements of their index finger. All subjects attended different experimental sessions in which (1) all proprioceptive feedback was eliminated by the ischaemic block technique, (2) muscle spindle feedback was distorted by vibration of the muscles and tendons involved in the movement, and (3) proprioceptive feedback was normal.Within each session subjects were required firstly to recall triangular movements made for them passively by the experimenter, and secondly, to recall movements they had made actively. Results indicated comparable accuracy in recall of active movements in all conditions, and a decrement in passive recall dependent on the availability of the alternative sources of feedback. The results indicated a process of integrated contribution of all inputs to the perception of movement; redundancy in information when all channels are available; and a role of corollary discharge in recall of movements.