Support for an explanation of the guidance effect in motor skill learning

D I Anderson, R A Magill, H Sekiya, G Ryan, D I Anderson, R A Magill, H Sekiya, G Ryan

Abstract

The authors investigated whether the knowledge of results (KR) schedule influences the extent to which intrinsic feedback is noticed and used. Fifty-six participants received KR that was either delayed over 2 trials (Delay-2) or provided directly after each trial (Delay-0) during 160 trials of an unfamiliar aiming task. No-KR retention tests were given after 80 trials and 1 min and 24 hr after the end of acquisition. After retention, all participants were questioned about their use of intrinsic feedback during practice and whether those sources changed as a function of practice. The Delay-2 group performed significantly less accurately on the 1st and last blocks of acquisition trials but showed a significantly smaller performance decline from acquisition to retention. Moreover, the Delay-2 group noticed and used a greater variety of intrinsic feedback sources and its members were more likely to report that their usage changed with practice.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Group × Block means for radial error in acquisition and retention. The Delay-0 group received knowledge of results immediately after each trial. The Delay-2 group received knowledge of results after a delay of two trials. Ret = retention.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Group × Block means for radial variable error (RVE) in acquisition and retention. The Delay-0 group received knowledge of results immediately after each trial. The Delay-2 group received knowledge of results after a delay of two trials. Ret = retention.

References

    1. Anderson DI. The discrimination, acquisition, and retention of aiming movements made with and without elastic resistance. Human Factors. 1999;41:129–138.
    1. Anderson DI, Magill RA, Sekiya H. A reconsideration of the trials-delay of knowledge of results paradigm in motor skill learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1994;65:286–290.
    1. Anderson DI, Magill RA, Sekiya H. Motor learning as a function of KR schedule and characteristics of taskintrinsic feedback. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2001;33:59–66.
    1. Annett J. The role of knowledge of results in learning: A survey. U.S. Naval Training Device Center; Port Washington, NY: 1961. (Tech. Rep. No. 342-3)
    1. Bahrick HP, Bennett WF, Fitts PM. Accuracy of positioning responses as a function of spring loading in a control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1955;49:437–444.
    1. Bahrick HP, Fitts PM, Schneider R. Reproduction of simple movements as a function of factors influencing proprioceptive feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1955;49:445–454.
    1. Buekers MJ, Magill RA. The role of task experience and prior knowledge for detecting invalid augmented feedback while learning a motor skill. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1995;48A:84–97.
    1. Christina RW, Shea JB. The limitations of generalization based on restricted information. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1988;59:291–297.
    1. Christina RW, Shea JB. More on assessing the retention of motor learning based on restricted information. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1993;64:217–222.
    1. Greenhouse SW, Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika. 1959;24:95–112.
    1. Guadagnoli MA, Dornier LA, Tandy RD. Optimal length for summary knowledge of results: The influence of task-related experience and complexity. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1996;67:239–248.
    1. Hancock GR, Butler MS, Fischman MG. On the problem of two-dimensional error scores: Measures and analyses of accuracy, bias, and consistency. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1995;27:241–250.
    1. Lavery JJ. The effect of one-trial delay in knowledge of results on the acquisition and retention of a tossing skill. American Journal of Psychology. 1964;77:437–443.
    1. Lavery JJ, Suddon FH. Retention of simple motor skills as a function of the number of trials by which KR is delayed. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1962;15:231–237.
    1. Lee TD, Swinnen SP, Serrien DJ. Cognitive effort and motor learning. Quest. 1994;46:328–344.
    1. Magill RA, Wood CA. Knowledge of results precision as a learning variable in motor skill acquisition. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1986;57:170–173.
    1. Patrick J, Mutlusoy F. The relationship between types of feedback, gain of a display and feedback precision in acquisition of a simple motor task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1982;34A:171–182.
    1. Proteau L, Marteniuk RG, Girouard Y, Dugas C. On the type of information used to control and learn an aiming movement after moderate and extensive training. Human Movement Science. 1987;6:181–199.
    1. Proteau L, Marteniuk RG, Lévesque L. A sensorimotor basis for motor learning: Evidence indicating specificity of practice. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1992;44A:557–575.
    1. Salmoni AW, Schmidt RA, Walter CB. Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin. 1984;95:355–386.
    1. Schmidt RA. Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In: Requin J, Stelmach GE, editors. Tutorials in motor neuroscience. Kluwer; Amsterdam: 1991. pp. 59–75.
    1. Schmidt RA, Lange C, Young DE. Optimizing summary knowledge of results for skill learning. Human Movement Science. 1990;9:325–348.
    1. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. 3rd ed. Human Kinetics; Champaign, IL: 1999.
    1. Schmidt RA, White JL. Evidence for an error detection mechanism in motor skills: A test of Adams’ closed-loop theory. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1972;4:143–153.
    1. Shea CH, Kohl R, Indermill C. Contextual interference: Contributions of practice. Acta Psychologica. 1990;73:145–157.
    1. Suddon FH, Lavery JJ. The effect of amount of training on retention of a simple motor skill with 0- and 5-trial delays of knowledge of results. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 1962;16:312–317.
    1. Swinnen SP, Schmidt RA, Nicholson DE, Shapiro DC. Information feedback for skill acquisition: Instantaneous knowledge of results degrades learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1990;16:706–716.
    1. Thomas JR, Salazar W, Landers DM. What is missing in p < .05? Effect size. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1991;62:344–348.
    1. Williams ID. Practice and augmentation in learning. Human Factors. 1974;16:503–507.
    1. Winstein CJ, Schmidt RA. Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1990;16:677–691.
    1. Young DE, Schmidt RA. Augmented feedback for enhanced skill acquisition. In: Stelmach GE, Requin J, editors. Tutorials in motor behavior II. North-Holland; Amsterdam: 1992. pp. 677–693.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe