Performance on trials without knowledge results (KR) in reduced relative frequency presentations of KR

Following Salmoni, Schmidt, & Walter's (1984) discussion of knowledge of results (KR) as a variable influencing learning, the effect of varying relative frequency of KR while holding absolute number of trials constant was examined. In two experiments, the same treatment groups were compared in acquisition, retention (after 2 min and 24 hr), and on their pattern of responses on the sequence of no-KR trials following a KR trial. In Experiment 1, differences between groups in acquisition were consistent with the number of KR trials received, and there were no differences between groups in either of the retention conditions. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 with a more difficult task. There were no between-group differences in acquisition. In Retention 1, the 100% and 33% relative frequency groups outperformed the less frequent KR groups, whereas in Retention 2, this trend was reversed. The findings from Experiment 2 provide qualified support for the hypothesis that reduced relative frequency of KR in acquisition facilitates performance in retention. The pattern of responses on the sequence of no-KR trials following a KR trial were consistent with Adams' (1971) perceptual-trace decay hypothesis.     

Bandwidth knowledge of results and motor learning: More than just a relative frequency effect

Motor learning is facilitated when knowledge of results (KR) is presented in accordance with a goal-centred bandwidth (i.e. when the error exceeds a tolerance limit about a movement goal). However, under different conditions of the bandwidth procedure the frequency with which KR is provided is also affected—the wider the goal-centred tolerance limits, the lower the frequency of KR. Since low-KR frequency conditions also have been shown to facilitate motor learning, it is not known whether the bandwidth KR effect is a unique phenomenon in motor learning or is simply due to differences in the frequency of KR. In the present study we partitioned the effects due to bandwidth KR from the effects due to KR frequency using a yoking procedure. Results from the acquisition performance trials indicated that bandwidth procedures exerted both error reduction and performance stabilization influences on motor behaviour that exceeded the effects of the relative frequency control procedures. Bandwidth procedures further resulted in better performance consistency during retention than the relative frequency conditions. These findings were discussed in terms of how KR about movement error and KR about the correctness of movement affect the learning of motor skill.     

The role of knowledge of results frequency in learning through observation

The authors examined whether reduced knowledge of results (KR) frequency during observation of a model's performance enhances learning. As they viewed a timing task, observers (n = 54) received KR about the model's performance on each trial (100% KR) or on 1 out of 3 trials (33% KR). Controls (n = 18) received only physical practice; they did not take part in the observation session. The authors also wanted to dissociate the guidance effect of KR during physical practice from the guidance role played by the representation acquired during observation. Therefore, following the observation phase, participants physically performed the task with either the same or a different KR frequency than that experienced during observation. The effects of observation and physical practice on learning were assessed in delayed retention tests. The beneficial effect of reduced KR frequency during observation continued for the following physical practice phases. Possible explanations as to why KR influences observational learning are discussed.     

Resolving a conflict between sensory feedback and knowledge of results, while learning a motor skill

In a recent study, Buekers, Magill, and Hall (1992) showed that even when verbal knowledge of results (KR) was redundant with sensory feedback, erroneous KR influenced the learning of motor skills. To determine why this occurred, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, subjects performed 50 practice trials on a complex anticipation task and then performed three non-KR retention tests of 25 trials each. The results indicated that when correct KR and erroneous KR were provided alternately, subjects ignored the erroneous KR and performed according to the correct KR. Experiment 2 compared different ratios of no KR to erroneous KR. The results showed that, for low ratios (1:1 and 4:1), learning experience was similar to a condition in which erroneous KR was presented on all trials. For a higher ratio (9:1), however, learning performance was similar to performance when KR was correct on all trials or was not presented. These results are interpreted as support for the hypothesis that when two conflicting sources of information are available, the subject's degree of uncertainty about the valid source of information influences his selection of the information to guide performance.     

Observational learning: effects of bandwidth knowledge of results

The authors investigated whether bandwidth knowledge of results (KR) during observation of a model's performance enhances motor skill learning. Following a pretest, 2 groups of participants (N = 28) observed a model practicing a timing task. The bandwidth group received KR about the model's performance only when his performance fell outside the criteria for a correct response. The yoked group received KR on the same trials as the bandwidth group did but were not told that the KR was only about incorrect performances. In that way, the authors avoided a confound between bandwidth and relative frequency effects on performance and learning. Following the observation phase, both groups of participants performed 10-min and 24-hr retention tests. Bandwidth KR enabled that group to reduce its performance variability and, to a lesser extent, to enhance its performance accuracy. The authors discuss the results with respect to the powerful effect of qualitative KR through observation.     

Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: support for the guidance hypothesis

Summary knowledge of results (KR) involves the presentation KR for each of a set of trials (e.g., 10) only after the last trial in the set has been completed. Earlier, Lavery (1962) showed that, relative to providing KR after each trial, a 20-trial summary KR was detrimental to performance in a practice phase with KR present but was beneficial for a no-KR retention test. Using a relatively simple ballistic-timing task, we examined summary lengths of 1 (essentially KR after every trial), 5, 10, and 15 trials, searching for an inverted-U relationship between summary length and retention performance as predicated by a guidance hypothesis for KR. During acquisition when KR was present and being manipulated, all groups showed improvements in performance across practice, while increased summary lengths generally depressed performance. However, in a delayed no-KR retention test, there was an inverse relation between the summary length in acquisition and absolute constant error on the retention test. A guidance hypothesis is favored to explain how, relative to immediate KR, long KR summaries can provide detrimental effects in acquisition while enhancing retention performance.     

Motor Learning Without Knowledge of Results Through the Development of a Response Recognition Mechanism

Four experiments were conducted to investigate the ability of a response recognition mechanism, developed by presenting the sensory consequences associated with the criterion movement in the absence of actual movement recall, to produce motor learning in the absence of knowledge of results (KR). In Experiments 1 and 2, a rapid linear timing task was used (10.16 cm in 100 msec), and reduction of movement error resulted over no-KR practice trials. Experiments 3 and 4 employed a slow movement-time task (750 and 1250 msec) and a linear positioning task, respectively, and no reduction of movement error occurred over the no-KR practice trials in either experiment. The ability of the response recognition mechanism to produce motor learning in the absence of KR depended upon the extent to which feedback could be used during response production.     

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.     

Reducing Knowledge of Results about Relative versus Absolute Timing: Differential Effects on Learning

The purpose of the present experiment was to examine further earlier suggestions that a reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results (KR) can enhance the learning of generalized motor programs (GMPs) but at the same time degrade parameter learning, compared with giving KR after every trial (Wulf & Schmidt, 1989; Wulf, Schmidt, & Deubel, 1993). In contrast to these earlier studies, here KR was given separately for relative timing and absolute timing. Subjects practiced three movement patterns that required the same relative timing but different absolute movement times. KR was provided on 100% or 50% of the practice trials for relative timing or absolute timing, respectively. In retention and transfer tests, the groups that had had 50% KR about relative timing demonstrated more effective learning of the relative-timing structure, that is, GMP learning, than the groups that had had 100% KR about relative timing. The KR frequency had no effect on parameterization during retention; yet, when transfer to a task with a novel overall duration was required, the groups given 100% KR about absolute timing were more accurate in parameterization than the groups provided with 50% KR about absolute timing. Thus, the reduced relative KR frequency enhanced GMP learning but had no beneficial effect, or even a degrading effect, on parameter learning. The differential effects of a reduced KR frequency on the learning of relative timing and absolute timing also provide additional support for the dissociation of GMP and parameterization processes.     

Reducing Knowledge of Results About Relative Versus Absolute Timing: Differential Effects on Learning

The purpose of the present experiment was to examine further earlier suggestions that a reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results (KR) can enhance the learning of generalized motor programs (GMPs) but at the same time degrade parameter learning, compared with giving KR after every trial (Wulf & Schmidt, 1989; Wulf, Schmidt, & Deubel, 1993). In contrast to these earlier studies, here KR was given separately for relative timing and absolute timing. Subjects practiced three movement patterns that required the same relative timing but different absolute movement times. KR was provided on 100% or 50% of the practice trials for relative timing or absolute timing, respectively. In retention and transfer tests, the groups that had had 50% KR about relative timing demonstrated more effective learning of the relative-timing structure, that is, GMP learning, than the groups that had had 100% KR about relative timing. The KR frequency had no effect on parameterization during retention; yet, when transfer to a task with a novel overall duration was required, the groups given 100% KR about absolute timing were more accurate in parameterization than the groups provided with 50% KR about absolute timing. Thus, the reduced relative KR frequency enhanced GMP learning but had no beneficial effect, or even a degrading effect, on parameter learning. The differential effects of a reduced KR frequency on the learning of relative timing and absolute timing also provide additional support for the dissociation of GMP and parameterization processes.     

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.     

Meta-analysis of the reduced relative feedback frequency effect on motor learning and performance

A fundamental motor learning principle conveyed in textbooks is that augmented terminal feedback frequency differentially affects motor learning and performance. The guidance hypothesis predicts that relative to a reduced frequency of feedback, providing learners with feedback following every practice trial enhances practice performance but degrades subsequent motor learning. This change in effectiveness for each relative feedback frequency is called a reversal effect, and because it is thought that practice variables can have distinct impacts on learning and performance, delayed retention tests are considered the gold standard in motor learning research. The objectives of this meta-analysis were to a) synthesize the available evidence regarding feedback frequency, performance, and motor learning to test whether there are significant changes in effectiveness from acquisition and immediate retention to delayed retention, b) evaluate potential moderators of these effects, and c) investigate the potential influence of publication bias on this literature. We screened 1662 articles found in PubMed and PsycINFO databases as well as with reference tracing and a targeted author search. A final sample of 61 eligible papers were included in the primary analysis (k = 75, N = 2228). Results revealed substantial heterogeneity but no significant moderators, high levels of uncertainty, and no significant effect of reduced feedback frequency at any time point. Further, multilevel analyses revealed no evidence of a significant change in effect from acquisition or immediate retention to delayed retention. Z-curve analysis suggested the included studies were severely underpowered. These results suggest that robust evidence regarding feedback frequency and motor learning is lacking.     

When to Provide Knowledge of Results During Motor Learning: Scheduling Effects

On what basis should sources of information feedback be scheduled when de- livered to someone learning a motor skill? In two experiments, we examined the influence of several knowledge of results (KR) schedules on the acquisi- tion and retention of a multisegment movement timing task. In these experi- ments a blocked KR schedule was detrimental to both skill acquisition and retention, likely because the delivery of KR for one particular information source over repeated trials focused the learner on only that part of the action, rather than learning the whole action. In Experiment 1, we found that a ran- dom schedule produced better acquisition and retention performance than the blocked schedule. In Experiment 2, we attempted to optimize a schedule by delivering KR for the segment that had been performed most poorly. Al- though this performance-sensitive (P-S) manipulation resulted in better learning than under a blocked schedule, it was no better than a quasi-random, yoked control condition. These findings are discussed in terms of the nature of the action planning activities of the learner and how schedules of KR affect learner strategies.     

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.     

Time estimation: does the reference memory mediate the effect of knowledge of results?

This study presents evidence for the role of knowledge of results (KR) in the estimation of medium time intervals (4-12 s durations). Experiment 1 tested the hypothesis that KR operates at the same stage of temporal processing as attention. The absence of an interaction of attention and KR is taken as evidence against this hypothesis. Experiments 2 and 3 further studied the effects of KR in a reproduction and a production task, respectively. The effects of KR were small in the reproduction and substantial in the production task. The results are interpreted in terms of a clock-based timing model and the findings taken together converge on the interpretation that KR affects the reference memory (RM), rather than the other components of the model.     

Autonomy support and reduced feedback frequency have trivial effects on learning and performance of a golf putting task

Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) Theory proposes that choices of any kind support an individual's need for autonomy, motivating them to learn and perform motor skills more effectively. Notably, the authors suggest asking learners to choose when to receive feedback in order to increase autonomy. Conversely, the guidance hypothesis predicts an impact of feedback schedule independent of motivational influences. The purpose of this experiment was to compare the relative and combined effects of autonomy and feedback schedule for the acquisition of a golf putting task without vision of results. Autonomy support (autonomy support vs. yoked) and knowledge of results (KR) schedule (100%-KR vs. 50%-faded-KR) were combined in a 2 × 2 factorial design. Participants (N = 56) in the autonomy support groups were asked to choose from three colours of golf balls for each putt during 10 acquisition blocks. Yoked groups were yoked to the golf ball colour choices of their autonomy support group counterparts. Participants in the 100%-feedback schedule groups were provided x- and y-coordinate KR following every putt during acquisition, while participants in the 50%-faded groups received KR after half of their putts, with feedback frequency decreasing over acquisition blocks. All participants completed a 24-h delayed retention and transfer test without KR. The results were somewhat consistent with OPTIMAL Theory yet the effects were not statistically significant and trivially small. The results were inconsistent with the guidance hypothesis.     

Effects of reducing frequency of intrinsic knowledge of results on the learning of a motor skill

The guidance hypothesis suggests too much knowledge of results during skill acquisition can be detrimental to long-term performance. Possibly, the learner becomes dependent on augmented KR and is unable to use intrinsic feedback. This study examined this hypothesis with three groups performing a golf putting task. One group received continuous KR about ball path and final location; the other groups were deprived of specific KR on 50% or 100% of the acquisition trials. As expected, the continuous KR group performed better during acquisition, but the KR-deprived groups performed better on delayed retention trials, especially when KR was absent.     

The role of verbal estimates of movement error in ballistic skill acquisition

The role of verbal estimates of movement error in a ballistic movement task was investigated. Two groups performed a rapid linear movement timing task for 50 trials with KR followed by 50 trials without KR. Group I was required to give a verbal estimate of movement time immediately after the task, while Group II was not. Verbal labeling of movement error did not augment performance when KR was present. When KR was withdrawn, however, Group I maintained performance, but Group II's response accuracy declined. Implications for current motor learning theories are discussed.     

Reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results without visual feedback in learning a golf-putting task

This study examined the effects of reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results (KR) on learning to putt in golf. Participants (19 men and 15 women) putted a golf ball, stopping the ball on a line at a distance of 3.5 m from the starting position, which included an uphill portion. After a pretest, participants were assigned as they arrived in balanced order by sex to one of two groups (100% KR, 33% KR) and practiced 60 trials. Those in the 100% KR group performed the task in its natural context, while others assigned to the 33% KR were shown the location of the putted ball after every third trial. All participants then performed a posttest and two retention tests, done 10 min. and 24 hr. after the posttest. Analysis at posttest showed each group had a constant error and an absolute constant error (/CE/) less than those at pretest. Also, in the retention test conducted the following day, the constant error of the 33% KR group was less than that of the 100% KR group. Third, in the posttest and both retention tests, the /CE/ of the 100% KR group was larger than that of the 33% KR group. These results suggest that reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results is effective in learning the accuracy of the golf putt.