Expecting to teach enhances motor learning and information processing during practice

Recent research has revealed that having learners study and practice a motor skill with the expectation of having to teach it enhances motor learning. However, the mechanisms underlying this effect remain unknown. We attempted to replicate this effect and elucidate the mechanisms underlying it. Thus, participants studied golf putting instructions and practiced putting either with the expectation of having to teach another participant how to putt or the expectation of being tested on their putting. During this acquisition phase, participants’ motivation, anxiety, and information processing (the duration they took preparing each putt) were indexed as possible mechanisms underlying a motor learning effect. One day and seven days after the acquisition phase, learning was assessed by testing all participants on their golf putting. Results revealed that expecting to teach enhanced motor learning, replicating the original finding. Moreover, expecting to teach increased the duration participants took preparing each putt, which was correlated with superior motor learning. Thus, results suggest expecting to teach enhances motor learning by increasing information processing during practice.     

Adapting relative phase of bimanual isometric force coordination through scaling visual information intermittency

Visual information plays an adaptive role in the relation between bimanual force coupling and error corrective processes of isometric force control. In the present study, the evolving distribution of the relative phase properties of bimanual isometric force coupling was examined by scaling within a trial the temporal feedback rate of visual intermittency (short to long presentation intervals and vice versa). The force error (RMSE) was reduced, and time-dependent irregularity (SampEn) of the force output was increased with greater amounts of visual information (shorter intermittency). Multi-stable coordination patterns of bimanual isometric force control were differentially shifted toward and away from the intrinsic dynamics by the changing the intermittency of visual information. The distribution of Hilbert transformed relative phase values showed progressively a predominantly anti-phase mode under less intermittent visual information to predominantly an in-phase mode with limited (almost no) visual information. Correlation between the hands showed a continuous reduction, rather than abrupt “transition,” with increase in visual information, although no mean negative correlation was realized, despite the tendency towards an anti-phase distribution. Lastly, changes in both the performance outcome and bimanual isometric force coordination occurred at visual feedback rates faster than the minimal visual processing times established from single limb movement and isometric force protocols.     

Brief report: Response inhibition and processing speed in children with motor difficulties and developmental coordination disorder

A previous study reported that children with poor motor skills, classified as having motor difficulties (MD) or Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD), produced more errors in a motor response inhibition task compared to typically developing (TD) children but did not differ in verbal inhibition errors. The present study investigated whether these groups differed in the length of time they took to respond in order to achieve these levels of accuracy, and whether any differences in response speed could be explained by generally slow information processing in children with poor motor skills. Timing data from the Verbal Inhibition Motor Inhibition test were analyzed to identify differences in performance between the groups on verbal and motor inhibition, as well as on processing speed measures from standardized batteries. Although children with MD and DCD produced more errors in the motor inhibition task than TD children, the current analyses found that they did not take longer to complete the task. Children with DCD were slower at inhibiting verbal responses than TD children, while the MD group seemed to perform at an intermediate level between the other groups in terms of verbal inhibition speed. Slow processing speed did not account for these group differences. Results extended previous research into response inhibition in children with poor motor skills by explicitly comparing motor and verbal responses, and suggesting that slow performance, even when accurate, may be attributable to an inefficient way of inhibiting responses, rather than slow information processing speed per se.     

Procedural learning: A developmental study of motor sequence learning and probabilistic classification learning in school-aged children

In this study, we investigated motor and cognitive procedural learning in typically developing children aged 8–12 years with a serial reaction time (SRT) task and a probabilistic classification learning (PCL) task. The aims were to replicate and extend the results of previous SRT studies, to investigate PCL in school-aged children, to explore the contribution of declarative knowledge to SRT and PCL performance, to explore the strategies used by children in the PCL task via a mathematical model, and to see whether performances obtained in motor and cognitive tasks correlated. The results showed similar learning effects in the three age groups in the SRT and in the first half of the PCL tasks. Participants did not develop explicit knowledge in the SRT task whereas declarative knowledge of the cue–outcome associations correlated with the performances in the second half of the PCL task, suggesting a participation of explicit knowledge after some time of exposure in PCL. An increasing proportion of the optimal strategy use with increasing age was observed in the PCL task. Finally, no correlation appeared between cognitive and motor performance. In conclusion, we extended the hypothesis of age invariance from motor to cognitive procedural learning, which had not been done previously. The ability to adopt more efficient learning strategies with age may rely on the maturation of the fronto-striatal loops. The lack of correlation between performance in the SRT task and the first part of the PCL task suggests dissociable developmental trajectories within the procedural memory system.     

Procedural learning,consolidation, and transfer of a new skill in Developmental Coordination Disorder

The aim of this study was to explore the differences in procedural learning abilities between children with DCD and typically developing children by investigating the steps that lead to skill automatization (i.e., the stages of fast learning, consolidation, and slow learning). Transfer of the skill to a new situation was also assessed. We tested 34 children aged 6–12 years with and without DCD on a perceptuomotor adaptation task, a form of procedural learning that is thought to involve the cerebellum and the basal ganglia (regions whose impairment has been associated with DCD) but also other brain areas including frontal regions. The results showed similar rates of learning, consolidation, and transfer in DCD and control children. However, the DCD children's performance remained slower than that of controls throughout the procedural task and they reached a lower asymptotic performance level; the difficulties observed at the outset did not diminish with practice.     

Enhanced encoding of the co-actor's target stimuli during a shared non-motor task

Task co-representation has been proposed to rely on the motor brain areas’ capacity to represent others’ action plans similarly to one's own. The joint memory (JM) effect suggests that working in parallel with others influences the depth of incidental encoding: Other-relevant items are better encoded than non-task-relevant items. Using this paradigm, we investigated whether task co-representation could also emerge for non-motor tasks. In Experiment 1, we found enhanced recall performance to stimuli relevant to the co-actor also when the participants’ task required non-motor responses (counting the target words) instead of key-presses. This suggests that the JM effect did not depend on simulating the co-actor's motor responses. In Experiment 2, direct visual access to the co-actor and his actions was found to be unnecessary to evoke the JM effect in case of the non-motor, but not in case of the motor task. Prior knowledge of the co-actor's target category is sufficient to evoke deeper incidental encoding. Overall, these findings indicate that the capacity of task co-representation extends beyond the realm of motor tasks: Simulating the other's motor actions is not necessary in this process.     

Bio-inspired cognitive model of motor learning by imitation

Learning, and even more so by imitation, is an essential Cognitive Functions because it is carried out throughout life and allows us to adapt our behaviors from other beings through observation. In this work, we propose a model, and implementation of the cognitive function of imitation motor learning (IML), based on psychological and neuroscientific evidence. According to the evidence, learning by imitation includes imitation of action and imitation of action over an object sub-processes. The imitation of action consists of the movement of the limbs. The imitation of action over an object consists of the interaction with an object within the environment. We achieve an implementation of the proposed model for IML and endow a virtual entity with it. In order to validate the proposal, we use a case study to analyze the sub-processes performance. From results, we conclude that both imitation of action and imitation of action over an object sub-processes play an essential role in getting the agent to interact with stimuli within the environment.     

Different task success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not improve golf putting performance

This study examined how providing different criteria for success affected perceived expectations of success, performance, and learning in a golf-putting task. Twenty-nine physical education students were divided into three experimental groups: (a) a large-circle (LC) group that practiced 10 blocks of five putts, each with a 40 cm diameter circle around the target; (b) a small circle (SC) group that practiced with a 10 cm diameter circle around the target; and (c) a control (C) group that practiced with a 25 cm diameter circle around the target. Forty-eight hours after practice, the participants performed a retention test and a transfer test with a 25 cm diameter circle. The transfer test included putting from a greater distance and from a different angle. Throughout the study, we asked the participants to tell us what they think their chances are to land 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 balls out of 5 possible balls in each block. There were four main findings: (a) the SC group had lower expectancies of success compared with the LC and C groups in acquisition; (b) there were no group differences in performance or learning among groups; (c) golf club kinematic parameters worsened in the transfer test; and (d) the LC group reduced their expectancies of success from the retention to the transfer test, but the expectancies of the SC and C groups remained the same. We conclude that changes in success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not affect actual putting performance or 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.     

How are social-emotional and behavioral competences and problems at age 1 year associated with infant motor development? A general population study

Based on limitations in previous research evidence, we concluded that more research is needed for deeper understanding of how social-emotional and behavioral (SEB) outcomes among infant-toddler-aged children in the general population are associated with early motor development. In this study, we investigated associations between early competencies and problems, as measured by the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA), and the timing of achievement of the main gross and fine motor milestones usually attained during the first year of life in a general population context. The study sample consisted of 515 infants (mean age 12.9 [SD 0.9] months) and their parents (514 mothers, 434 fathers), who were recruited in child health centers in Northern Finland. The infants were divided into two groups, based on their BITSEA screen status, and motor milestone achievement ages were compared across BITSEA screen status No Concern and Of-Concern infants. An Of-Concern screen status on the maternal and paternal Competence scale and Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) item cluster was associated with later infant achievement ages for gross motor milestones. By contrast, infants who were screened to be in the Of-Concern range on the maternal Problem scale achieved gross motor milestones earlier than infants with the corresponding No Concern screen status. No significant associations were found between the paternal Problem scale screen status and infant motor development. In further analyses, the strongest associations were found between an Of-Concern screen status on the paternal Competence scale and ASD item cluster and infant motor development. The findings indicate that the inclusion of infant motor developmental information may assist early identification and the clinical interpretation of parental reports of early SEB problems. Clinical implications of the current findings are discussed in the paper.