Dissociating the contributions of motivational and information processing factors to the self-controlled feedback learning benefit

Giving learners control over their feedback schedule has been shown to enhance motor learning. This effect has been attributed to enhanced intrinsic motivation via fulfilling learners’ needs for feelings of autonomy and competence, and greater information processing through provoking learners to estimate their errors. However, there is a lack of studies dissociating the contributions of motivational and information processing factors to the self-controlled feedback learning effect. To address this shortcoming, we crossed self-controlled feedback and error estimation in the same experimental design in the largest pre-registered self-control study to date (N = 200). Participants performed a nondominant arm bean bag tossing task under one of four training conditions in which feedback schedule was either controlled by the participant or matched to a counterpart and error estimation was either mandatory or not enforced. Learning was assessed 24 h after the acquisition phase in retention and transfer tests. Results showed no statistically significant learning advantage for participants given control over feedback despite promoting spontaneous error estimation, and, surprisingly, results showed a disadvantage specific to the transfer test for participants obligated to estimate their errors. Further, although self-control over feedback resulted in its delivery on relatively accurate trials and slightly increased learners’ perceived autonomy, it did not enhance perceived competence or intrinsic motivation. At the individual level, however, intrinsic motivation did predict motor learning. The present study challenges the benefit of self-controlled feedback while supporting the positive effect of intrinsic motivation on motor learning.     

Delayed versus immediate feedback in children’s and adults’ vocabulary learning

We investigated whether the superior memory performance sometimes seen with delayed rather than immediate feedback was attributable to the shorter retention interval (orlag to test) from the last presentation of the correct information in the delayed condition. Whetherlag to test was controlled or not, delayed feedback produced better final test performance than did immediate feedback, which in turn produced better performance than did no feedback at all, when we tested Grade 6 children learning school-relevant vocabulary. With college students learning GRE-level words, however, delayed feedback produced better performance than did immediate feedback (and both were better than no feedback) when lag to test was uncontrolled, but there was no difference between the delayed and immediate feedback conditions when the lag to test was controlled.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The Clicker Technique: Cultivating Efficient Teaching and Successful Learning

The clicker technique is a newly developed system that uses frequent testing in the classroom to enhance students' understanding and provide feedback to students and teachers. Using a laboratory model of the clicker technique, Experiment 1 explored the effects of the clicker technique, via its potential for compressing learning time and its partially individualized instruction, on the acquisition, retention, and generalization of knowledge at immediate and delayed tests. Results supported the clicker technique as a viable method for instructors to promote generalizable learning and to conserve teaching time. Experiment 2 examined the clicker technique in terms of its components, studying and testing, to determine which components are crucial to its effectiveness. Results indicated that the combination of studying and testing promotes superior performance only during acquisition, relative to either studying or testing alone, and neither study, test, nor the combination of study and test led to a retention advantage. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Synchronous vs. non-synchronous imitation: Using dance to explore interpersonal coordination during observational learning

Observational learning can enhance the acquisition and performance quality of complex motor skills. While an extensive body of research has focused on the benefits of synchronous (i.e., concurrent physical practice) and non-synchronous (i.e., delayed physical practice) observational learning strategies, the question remains as to whether these approaches differentially influence performance outcomes. Accordingly, we investigate the differential outcomes of synchronous and non-synchronous observational training contexts using a novel dance sequence. Using multidimensional cross-recurrence quantification analysis, movement time-series were recorded for novice dancers who either synchronised with (n = 22) or observed and then imitated (n = 20) an expert dancer. Participants performed a 16-count choreographed dance sequence for 20 trials assisted by the expert, followed by one final, unassisted performance trial. Although end-state performance did not significantly differ between synchronous and non-synchronous learners, a significant decline in performance quality from imitation to independent replication was shown for synchronous learners. A non-significant positive trend in performance accuracy was shown for non-synchronous learners. For all participants, better imitative performance across training trials led to better end-state performance, but only for the accuracy (and not timing) of movement reproduction. Collectively, the results suggest that synchronous learners came to rely on a real-time mapping process between visual input from the expert and their own visual and proprioceptive intrinsic feedback, to the detriment of learning. Thus, the act of synchronising alone does not ensure an appropriate training context for advanced sequence learning.     

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.     

Motor skill acquisition and retention as a function of average feedback, summary feedback, and performance variability

Summary feedback involves withholding feedback from subjects until the last trial in a block is completed, and then presenting feedback about each trial. A variation of this method, called average feedback (Young & Schmidt, 1992), presents subjects with only the mean of the trial block. We investigated whether these methods have similar effects on acquisition and retention of a simple motor skill. Five groups of subjects (n = 16 per group) performed 60 acquisition trials of an aiming task involving both spatial and temporal accuracy. We presented average and summary feedback based on either 5-trial blocks or 15-trial blocks and compared these schedules with every-trial feedback. During acquisition, all groups improved with practice, with a slight tendency for the every-trial condition to have less absolute error than the longer summary and average conditions. Analysis of delayed no-feedback retention tests, however, revealed a strong advantage for the 5-trial summary and average conditions compared with the every-trial condition. In addition, we found that for long blocks of acquisition trials without augmented feedback, the performance variability of those trials was associated with retention performance. Results are discussed in terms of how these different manipulations may make feedback less useful during acquisition, but foster the use of certain information processing activities that enhance overall learning.     

Using error-estimation to probe the psychological processes underlying contextual interference effects

Although the learning benefits of interleaved practice schedules relative to blocked schedules are well-reported, the mechanisms underlying these effects are not fully understood. Researchers have generally suggested that random schedules of practice increase task-related information processing which arises due to switching between variations of the same task (or switching between different tasks). Thus, one potentially useful way to both probe and manipulate contextual interference is to pair it with error estimation during practice. Forced error estimation increases task-related information processing and recording these estimates provides insight into learners' self-awareness of their errors. In the present study, 84 participants were randomly allocated to four groups. Participants practiced a timing task under blocked or random schedules, with and without error estimations prior to feedback. During the acquisition phase, three target times were trained (1500, 1700, 1900 ms), with feedback delivered after every trial. We used delayed post-tests (24 hrs later) to evaluate the retention of these target times and their transfer to two new target times (1600, 1800 ms). Participants who practiced with a random schedule performed worse (i.e., greater absolute error) than those with a blocked schedule during acquisition (p = .006); however, randomly scheduled participants also showed reduced error (p = .004) on the retention and transfer tests. Although prompting error estimations led to greater self-reported mental effort being invested on the task (p = .001), error estimation was not reliably associated with superior learning (p = .133). The accuracy of error estimations did not differ as a function of practice structure (p = .070), although the accuracy of error estimations improved during acquisition (p = .006). Findings highlight the robustness of the contextual interference effect, but we did not find evidence that error estimations moderated the effect on this task. It is in some ways surprising that we found an effect of contextual interference, as past-work suggests that interference effects are attenuated (or eliminated) when participants switch between different parameters of the same task. We speculate that this might be due to the difficulty of the task; even though participants switched between parametric variations of the same task, the distinction between parameters was subtle (i.e., tenths of a second).     

Effects of an external focus of attention and target occlusion on performance in virtual reality

The use of virtual reality as a training mechanism continues to gain popularity as equipment becomes more readily available. It is important to not only understand the relationship between virtual reality training and motor learning, but to understand the extent to which practice manipulations enhance performance in virtual reality. One common practice manipulation is adopting an external focus of attention, which has been shown to facilitate motor learning in a variety tasks. The purposes of the present study were to investigate the effectiveness of an external focus of attention and the effects of target occlusion times in virtual reality. Fifty-six participants performed a single-leg long jump during baseline, training, and retention and were randomly assigned to either an external or control group. During baseline and retention, all participants performed the task in both a virtual reality (VR) and real world (RW) environments. Training was all done in VR where participants were provided an external focus cue or no cue. Results revealed that individuals jumped significantly further in RW than VR in both baseline and retention (p < .001). During training, the external group jumped significantly further than control (p < .05). These results suggest that the adoption of an external focus improves performance during training. However, we did not see a benefit of an external focus in retention. These findings should be taken into consideration when using virtual reality as a training tool when performance must be transferred to a real world environment.     

Cognitive underpinnings of contextual interference during motor learning

The reported study examined the cognitive processes underlying contextual interference (CI) in motor learning. This experiment was designed to assess the combined influence of practice schedule (blocked or random) and task similarity (similar or dissimilar) on acquisition and retention performance. Participants (N = 60) learned a set of three variations of a timing task according to a similar (900, 1000 and 1100 ms) or dissimilar parameter condition (700, 1000 and 1300 ms) with either a blocked or random practice order: this resulted in 4 experimental groups. Performance in delayed retention demonstrated a typical CI effect due to the schedule of practice for the dissimilar parameter condition with the random practice group outperforming the blocked practice group. Conversely, no blocked-random difference was found for the similar parameter condition. These findings lend support for the reconstruction hypothesis by showing that supplementing random practice with additional intertask elaboration (i.e., similar parameter condition) did not facilitate subsequent retention performance.     

The influence of robotic guidance on error detection and correction mechanisms

New technologies have expanded the available methods to help individuals learn or re-learn motor skills. Despite equivocal evidence for the impact of robotic guidance for motor skill acquisition (Marchal-Crespo, McHughen, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2010), we have recently shown that robotic guidance mixed with unassisted practice can significantly improve the learning of a golf putting task (Bested & Tremblay, 2018). To understand the mechanisms associated with this new mixed approach (i.e., unassisted and robot-guided practice) for the learning of a golf putting task, the current study aimed to determine if such mixed practice extends to one’s ability to detect errors. Participants completed a pre-test, an acquisition phase, as well as immediate, delayed (24-h), and transfer post-tests. During the pre-test, kinematic data from the putter was converted into highly accurate, consistent, and smooth trajectories delivered by a robot arm. During acquisition, 2 groups performed putts towards 3 different targets with robotic guidance on either 0% or 50% of acquisition trials. Only the 50% guidance group significantly reduced ball endpoint distance and variability, as well as ball endpoint error estimations, between the pre-test and the post-tests (i.e., immediate retention, 24-h retention, and 24-h transfer). The current study showed that allowing one to experience both robotic guidance and unassisted (i.e., errorful) performances enhances one’s ability to detect errors, which can explain the beneficial motor learning effects of a mixed practice schedule.     

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.     

Influence of practice schedules and attention on skill development and retention

Focus of attention during dual-tasks and practice schedules are important components of motor skill performance and learning; often studied in isolation. The current study required participants to complete a simple key-pressing task under a blocked or random practice schedule. To manipulate attention, participants reported their finger position (i.e., skill-focused attention) or the pitch of an auditory tone (i.e., extraneous attention) while performing two variations of a dual-task key-pressing task. Analyses were conducted at baseline, 10 min and 24 h after acquisition. The results revealed that participants in a blocked schedule, extraneous focus condition had significantly faster movement times during retention compared to a blocked schedule, skill focus condition. Furthermore, greatest improvements from baseline to immediate and delayed retention were evident for an extraneous attention compared to the skill-focused attention, regardless of practice schedule. A discussion of the unique benefits an extraneous focus of attention may have on the learning process during dual-task conditions is presented.     

Enhancing the Learning of Sport Skills Through External-Focus Feedback

The authors examined how the effectiveness of feedback for the learning of complex motor skills is affected by the focus of attention it induces. The feedback referred specifically either to body movements (internal focus) or to movement effects (external focus). In Experiment 1, groups of novices and advanced volleyball players (N = 48) practiced “tennis” serves under internal-focus or external-focus feedback conditions in a 2 (expertise) × 2 (feedback type) design. Type of feedback did not differentially affect movement quality, but external-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy of the serves than internal-focus feedback during both practice and retention, independent of the level of expertise. In Experiment 2, the effects of relative feedback frequency as a function of attentional focus were examined. A 2 (feedback frequency: 100% vs. 33%) × 2 (feedback type) design was used. Experienced soccer players (N = 52) were required to shoot lofted passes at a target. External-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy than internal-focus feedback did. In addition, reduced feedback frequency was beneficial under internal-focus feedback conditions, whereas 100% and 33% feedback were equally effective under external-focus conditions. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of effect-related, as opposed to movement-related, feedback and also suggest that there is a need to revise current views regarding the role of feedback for motor learning.     

Self-control and frequency of model presentation: Effects on learning a ballet passé relevé

The purpose of this experiment was to examine the combined effects of self-control and frequency of model presentation on learning a complex motor skill, i.e., ballet passé relevé. Before practice started self-control participants were asked to choose two viewings or six viewings (before practice and then every five trials) and the externally controlled groups were yoked to their self-control counterparts. All participants completed 15 acquisition trials followed by 5 trials for the immediate and 5 trials for the delayed retention tests 48 hours later. Dependent variables included cognitive representation scores, physical reproduction rankings, and balance time. Statistical analyses indicated that under limited physical practice conditions self-control and higher frequency of model presentation facilitated the development of cognitive representation and did not produce further benefits in movement reproductions and balance time. The results were discussed with respect to the social cognitive theory.     

Stereotype threat affects the learning of sport motor skills

Studies have shown that stereotypical conditions can affect the performance of academic as well as motor skills (for a review see Chalabaev, Sarrazin, Fontayne, Boiché, & Clément-Guillotin, 2013). The objective of the present study was to investigate the influence of stereotype threat on the learning of a sport skill in women. Participants practiced 15 trials of a soccer dribbling task, and their learning was observed in immediate and delayed retention tests. Before practice, participants were divided into two groups which received instructions introducing the task as either involving athletic speed/power capacities, where women normally perform worse than men (stereotypical condition – ST), or as involving agility/coordination capacities, where women normally can perform similarly than men (nullified-stereotype condition – NST). They also filled out questionnaires measuring self-efficacy. Participants of the ST group showed significant lower motor performance and learning, as well as lower self-efficacy levels, than the NST group. The findings provide evidence that the learning of sport skills can be affected by stereotypical conditions. They add to the growing evidence of the impact of social-cognitive and affective factors on motor skill learning.