Literature DB >> 15810769

Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner's performance.

Suzete Chiviacowsky1, Gabriele Wulf.   

Abstract

The study follows up on the contention that self-controlled feedback schedules benefit learning because they are more tailored to the performers' needs than externally controlled feedback schedules (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002). Under this assumption, one would expect learning advantages for individuals who decide whether they want to receive feedback after a trial rather than before a trial. Participants practiced a sequential timing task, and all could decide the trials on which they received feedback. One group ("self-after") decided after every trial whether they wanted to receive feedback for that trial while another group ("self-before") made that decision before each trial The self-after group showed learning benefits on a delayed transfer test (novel absolute timing requirements) with regard to overall timing and relative-timing accuracy. Thus, self-controlled feedback was more effective when the learner could make a decision about receiving feedback after the trial. This seems to support the view that self-controlled feedback benefits learning, because learners can make a decision about feedback based on their performance on a given trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15810769     DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2005.10599260

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport        ISSN: 0270-1367            Impact factor:   2.500


  29 in total

1.  ACL Research Retreat VII: An Update on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk Factor Identification, Screening, and Prevention.

Authors:  Sandra J Shultz; Randy J Schmitz; Anne Benjaminse; Malcolm Collins; Kevin Ford; Anthony S Kulas
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 2.  Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning.

Authors:  Gabriele Wulf; Rebecca Lewthwaite
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

3.  Feedback and intention during motor-skill learning: a connection with prospective memory.

Authors:  Arnaud Badets; Yannick Blandin
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-07-19

4.  Not all choices are created equal: Task-relevant choices enhance motor learning compared to task-irrelevant choices.

Authors:  Michael J Carter; Diane M Ste-Marie
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-12

Review 5.  Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: a review.

Authors:  Roland Sigrist; Georg Rauter; Robert Riener; Peter Wolf
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-02

6.  An interpolated activity during the knowledge-of-results delay interval eliminates the learning advantages of self-controlled feedback schedules.

Authors:  Michael J Carter; Diane M Ste-Marie
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-02-18

7.  Response-based outcome predictions and confidence regulate feedback processing and learning.

Authors:  Romy Frömer; Matthew R Nassar; Rasmus Bruckner; Birgit Stürmer; Werner Sommer; Nick Yeung
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the primary motor cortex does not enhance the learning benefits of self-controlled feedback schedules.

Authors:  Michael J Carter; Victoria Smith; Anthony N Carlsen; Diane M Ste-Marie
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-02-27

9.  Video Feedback and 2-Dimensional Landing Kinematics in Elite Female Handball Players.

Authors:  Anne Benjaminse; Wytze Postma; Ina Janssen; Egbert Otten
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 2.860

10.  Relatedness support enhances motor learning.

Authors:  Daniela H Gonzalez; Suzete Chiviacowsky
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-12-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.