Literature DB >> 26892773

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

Michael J Carter1, Diane M Ste-Marie2.   

Abstract

The learning advantages of self-controlled knowledge-of-results (KR) schedules compared to yoked schedules have been linked to the optimization of the informational value of the KR received for the enhancement of one's error-detection capabilities. This suggests that information-processing activities that occur after motor execution, but prior to receiving KR (i.e., the KR-delay interval) may underlie self-controlled KR learning advantages. The present experiment investigated whether self-controlled KR learning benefits would be eliminated if an interpolated activity was performed during the KR-delay interval. Participants practiced a waveform matching task that required two rapid elbow extension-flexion reversals in one of four groups using a factorial combination of choice (self-controlled, yoked) and KR-delay interval (empty, interpolated). The waveform had specific spatial and temporal constraints, and an overall movement time goal. The results indicated that the self-controlled + empty group had superior retention and transfer scores compared to all other groups. Moreover, the self-controlled + interpolated and yoked + interpolated groups did not differ significantly in retention and transfer; thus, the interpolated activity eliminated the typically found learning benefits of self-controlled KR. No significant differences were found between the two yoked groups. We suggest the interpolated activity interfered with information-processing activities specific to self-controlled KR conditions that occur during the KR-delay interval and that these activities are vital for reaping the associated learning benefits. These findings add to the growing evidence that challenge the motivational account of self-controlled KR learning advantages and instead highlights informational factors associated with the KR-delay interval as an important variable for motor learning under self-controlled KR schedules.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26892773     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-016-0757-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  32 in total

1.  Information processes in movement learning: capacity and structural interference effects.

Authors:  R G Marteniuk
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 1.328

2.  Learner regulated knowledge of results during the acquisition of multiple timing goals.

Authors:  Jae T Patterson; Michael Carter
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 2.161

3.  Neural substrates of motor memory consolidation depend on practice structure.

Authors:  Shailesh S Kantak; Katherine J Sullivan; Beth E Fisher; Barbara J Knowlton; Carolee J Winstein
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2010-07-11       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  Inter-manual transfer and practice: coding of simple motor sequences.

Authors:  Stefan Panzer; Melanie Krueger; Thomas Muehlbauer; Attila J Kovacs; Charles H Shea
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2009-04-22

5.  Coding of on-line and pre-planned movement sequences.

Authors:  Attila J Kovacs; Jason Boyle; Nicole Grutmatcher; Charles H Shea
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2009-11-24

6.  Internal models in the cerebellum.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; R C Miall; M Kawato
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1998-09-01       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Self-control behaviors during the learning of a cascade juggling task.

Authors:  David D Laughlin; Jeffrey T Fairbrother; Craig A Wrisberg; Arya Alami; Leslee A Fisher; Schuyler W Huck
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 2.161

8.  The impact of concurrent visual feedback on coding of on-line and pre-planned movement sequences.

Authors:  Peter Leinen; Charles H Shea; Stefan Panzer
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2015-01-13

9.  The effects of self-controlled video feedback on the learning of the basketball set shot.

Authors:  Christopher Adam Aiken; Jeffrey T Fairbrother; Phillip Guy Post
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-09-11

10.  Grand challenge for movement science and sport psychology: embracing the social-cognitive-affective-motor nature of motor behavior.

Authors:  Rebecca Lewthwaite; Gabriele Wulf
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2010-08-23
View more
  4 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Exercising choice over feedback schedules during practice is not advantageous for motor learning.

Authors:  Laura St Germain; Brad McKay; Andrew Poskus; Allison Williams; Olena Leshchyshen; Sherry Feldman; Joshua G A Cashaback; Michael J Carter
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-09-26

4.  Size Perception of a Sport Target as a Function of Practice Success Conditions.

Authors:  Krystina Bianchi; Molly Brillinger; Jae Todd Patterson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-01-18
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.