رفتار حرکتی

اثر توهم بینایی بر یادگیری حرکتی ضربة پات‌گلف و خودکارآمدی در سالمندان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی‌ارشد رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدة علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

2 استادیار رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدة علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

چکیده
پژوهش‌های انجام‌شده درزمینة تأثیر توهم بینایی بر یادگیری حرکتی و خودکارآمدی کودکان و بزرگسالان نتایج مثبتی در برداشته‌اند؛ ازاین­رو، هدف از انجام پژوهش حاضر، بررسی اثر توهم بینایی بر یادگیری ضربة پات‌گلف و خودکارآمدی در سالمندان بود. در این مطالعة نیمه تجربی، 22 سالمند با میانگین سنی 77/1 ± 77/62 سال به روش نمونه­گیری دردسترس انتخاب شدند و به‌طور تصادفی به دو گروه مساوی توهم بینایی بزرگ و توهم بینایی کوچک تقسیم شدند. شرکت­کنندگان تکلیف ضربة پات‌گلف را از فاصلة دومتری در مراحل پیش­آزمون (10 کوشش)، اکتساب (50 کوشش شامل پنج بلوک 10 کوششی)، یادداری (10 کوشش) و انتقال (10 کوشش، از فاصلة جدید 5/2 متری) انجام دادند. یادگیری حرکتی شرکت­کنندگان به‌صورت خطای شعاعی ضربات پات‌گلف ثبت شد. همچنین، از پرسش‌نامة خودکارآمدی بندورابرای سنجش خودکارآمدی استفاده شد. نتایج آزمون تحلیل واریانس مرکب و آزمون تی نشان داد که بین دو نوع توهم بینایی در مرحلة اکتساب و انتقال مهارت پات‌گلف تفاوت وجود نداشت؛ اما در مرحلة یادداری، بین یادگیری دو نوع توهم بینایی تفاوت معنا­دار وجود داشت (0.05 ≥ P) و توهم بینایی بزرگ نسبت به توهم بینایی کوچک به بهبود یادگیری حرکتی منجر شد. بهبود خودکارآمدی در هر دو گروه نشان داده شد؛ اما بین خودکارآمدی دو گروه تفاوت معنا­دار مشاهده نشد (P ˃ 0.05). براساس یافته­های مطالعة حاضر می‌توان نتیجه­گیری کرد که سالمندان همانند سایر گروه­های سنی، در شرایط توهم بینایی بزرگ، بهبود یادگیری حرکتی را در مهارت­هایی نظیر ضربة پات‌گلف تجربه می‌کنند. دلیل احتمالی این بهبود می‌تواند افزایش امیدواری تقویت‌شده در شرایط توهم بینایی بزرگ باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

The Effect of Visual Illusion on Motor Learning of Golf Putting and Self-efficacy in Older Adults

نویسندگان English

  • Nasrin Tahan 1
  • Esmaeel Saemi 2
  • Rasool Abedanzadeh 2
1 M.Sc. of Motor Behavior, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
2 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
چکیده English

Research on the effect of visual illusion on motor learning and the self-efficacy of children and adults has shown positive results. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of visual illusion on learning of golf putting and self-efficacy in older adults. In this semi-experimental study, 22 older adults with mean age of 62.72 ± 1.77 years were selected through convenience sampling and randomly divided into two groups: large visual illusion (11) and small visual illusion (11). The participants completed a 2-meter distance golf putting task at pre-test stages (10 trials), acquisition (50 trials; 5 blocks of 10 trials), retention (10 trials), and transfer (10 trials; from a new 2.5 meter) they did. Participants' motor learning was recorded as a radial error in golf putting task. The Bandura self-efficacy questionnaire was used to measure self-efficacy. The results of Mixed ANOVA and t-test showed that although there is no difference between the two types of vision illusion in the acquisition and transfer phase, however, in the retention phase, there is a significant difference between tow visual illusion groups, and the large visual illusion group rather than the small visual illusion group (p≤0.05) resulted in improved motor learning. Also, the results of Mixed ANOVA showed an improvement in self-efficacy in both groups, however, no significant difference was found between the self-efficacy of the two groups. According to the findings of the present study, it can be concluded that older adults, like other age groups, show more motor learning in skills such as golf putting task in large visual illusion conditions. The probable cause of this improvement is an increase in enhanced expectancies in large visual illusion condition.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Ebbinghaus Visual Illusion
  • Optimal Motor Learning Theory
  • Enhanced Expectancies
  • Elderly
1. Mirzaei N, Mohammadi F, Nourozi K, Biglarian A. The effect of self-management training on self-efficacy of elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis. Iran Journal of Nursing. 2017;3(4):29-34. (In Persian).
2. Torabi F, Farahani A, Arbabi A. The effects of weekly response related to the number of training sessions on psychological factors and memory of sedentary elderly. Journal of Development and Motor Learning. 2017;8(4):683-98. (In Persian).
3. Nejati V. Relation between the active memory and vocal psychology in geriatric. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2012;8(3):412-7. (In Persian).
4. Ehsani F, Abdollahi I, Mohseni Bandpey MA. Comparing young and elderly serial reaction time task performance on repeated and random conditions. Iranian Journal of Ageing. 2012;7(2):68-74. (In Persian).
5. Heidari M, Ghodusi M. Comparative self-efficacy in elderly and non-elderly residents of family and nursing home in Shahrekord. Journal of Geriatric Nursing. 2015;1(2):68-78. (In Persian).
6. Roohi G, Asayesh H, Bathai SA, Shouri Bidgoli AR, Badeleh MT, Rahmani H. The relationship between self-efficacy and academic motivation among students of medical sciences. Journal of Medical Education and Development. 2013;8(1):45-51. (In Persian).
7. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychon B Rev. 2016;23(5):1382-414.
8. Lohse KR, Sherwood DE, Healy AF. How changing the focus of attention affects performance, kinematics, and electromyography in dart throwing. Hum Movement Sci. 2010;29(4):542-55.
9. Marchant DC. Attentional focusing instructions and force production. Front Psychol. 2011;1:210. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00210
10. Wulf G. Attentional focus and motor learning: a review of 15 years. Inte Rev Sport Exer P. 2013;6(1):77-104.
11. Chauvel G, Wulf G, Maquestiaux F. Visual illusions can facilitate sport skill learning. Psychon B Rev. 2015;22(3):717-21.
12. Pascua LA, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Additive benefits of external focus and enhanced performance expectancy for motor learning. J Sports Sci. 2015;33(1):58-66.
13. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Front Psychol. 2012;3:458. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00458
14. Witt JK, Riley MA. Discovering your inner Gibson: Reconciling action-specific and ecological approaches to perception–action. Psychon B Rev. 2014;21(6):1353-70.
15. Bach M, Poloschek CM. Optical illusions. Adv Clin Neurosci Rehabil. 2006;6(2): 20-1.
16. Block MN. An overview of visual hallucinations: patients who experience hallucinations secondary to a host of underlying conditions often will look to you for guidance, reassurance and treatment. Rev Opto. 2012;149(3):82-91.
17. Aglioti S, DeSouza JF, Goodale MA. Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr biol. 1995;5(6):679-85.
18. Witt JK, Linkenauger SA, Proffitt DR. Get me out of this slump! Visual illusions improve sports performance. Psychol Sci. 2012;23(4):397-9.
19. Wood G, Vine SJ, Wilson MR. The impact of visual illusions on perception, action planning, and motor performance. Atten Percept Psycho. 2013;75(5):830-4.
20. Shadmehr R, Holcomb HH. Neural correlates of motor memory consolidation. Science. 1997;277(5327):821-5.
21. Bahmani M, Wulf G, Ghadiri F, Karimi S, Lewthwaite R. Enhancing performance expectancies through visual illusions facilitates motor learning in children. Hum Movement Sci. 2017;55(1):1-7.
22. Beyranvand R, Sahebozamani M, Daneshjoo A, Mollahoseini S. The role of vision on balance recovery strategies in the elderly. 2017;5(9):95-103. (In Persian).
23. Ivers RQ, Cumming RG, Mitchell P, Attebo K. Visual impairment and falls in older adults: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998;46(1):58-64.
24. Lord SR. Visual risk factors for falls in older people. Age Ageing. 2006;35(2):42-5.
25. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor control: translating research into clinical practice. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
26. Bandura A. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. 2006;5(1):307-37.
27. Helmes E, Miller M. A comparison of MicroCog and the Wechsler Memory Scale in older adults. Appl neuropsychol. 2006;13(1):28-33.
28. Alipour A. The reliability and validity of chapman’s handedness inventory in junior high school students. Psychol sci. 2006;2(7):197-205.
29. Cañal-Bruland R, van der Meer Y, Moerman J. Can visual illusions be used to facilitate sport skill learning? J motor beh. 2016;48(5):285-389.
30. Bahmani M, Diekfuss JA, Rostami R, Ghadiri F, Ataee N. Visual illusions affect motor performance, but not learning in highly-skilled shooters. J Mot Lear Develop. 2017; 1;6(2):220-33.
31. Cañal-Bruland R, van der Kamp J. Action goals influence action-specific perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2009;16(6):1100-5.
32. Philbeck JW, Witt JK. Action-specific influences on perception and postperceptual processes: Present controversies and future directions. Psychol Bull. 2015;141(6):1120-44.
33. Witt JK, Linkenauger SA, Bakdash JZ, Proffitt DR. Putting to a bigger hole: Golf performance relates to perceived size. Psycho Bull Rev. 2008;15(3):581-5.
34. Badami R, VaezMousavi M, Wulf G, Namazizadeh M. Feedback after good versus poor trials affects intrinsic motivation. Res Q Exercise Sport. 2011;82(2):360-4.
35. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback: Does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it? Res Q Exercise Sport. 2002;73(4): 408-15.
36. Saemi E, Porter JM, Ghotbi-Varzaneh A, Zarghami M, Maleki F. Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2012;13(4):378-82.
37. Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. Q J Exp Psychol. 2010;63(4):738-49.
38. Palmer K, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Enhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2016;22:229-32.
39. Moritz SE, Feltz DL, Fahrbach KR, Mack DE. The relation of self-efficacy measures to sport performance: A meta-analytic review. Res Q Exercise Sport. 2000;71(3): 280-94.
40. Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Cardozo PL. Additive benefits of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies for motor learning. Hum Movement Sci. 2014;37:12-20.
41. Sugawara SK, Tanaka S, Okazaki S, Watanabe K, Sadato N. Social rewards enhance offline improvements in motor skill. PLOS One. 2012;7(11): 48174.
42. Skoura X, Personnier P, Vinter A, Pozzo T, Papaxanthis C. Decline in motor prediction in elderly subjects: right versus left arm differences in mentally simulated motor actions. Cortex. 2008;44(9):1271-8.
43. Azimzadeh E, Ghasemi A, Gholami A. Effect of selected visual and sport training program on visual skills. Motor Behavior. 2016;22(4):15-32. (In Persian).
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 11، شماره 37
پاییز 1398
آبان 1398
صفحه 151-166

  • تاریخ دریافت 08 اسفند 1397
  • تاریخ بازنگری 03 شهریور 1398
  • تاریخ پذیرش 17 شهریور 1398

صفحه اصلی

داوران

ارسال مقاله

اصول اخلاقی

اخبار و اعلانات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تماس با ما