Motor Behavior

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Magazine fees received

Guide for Authors

forms

Peer Review Process

The Effect of Contextual Interference on Acquisition, Retention and Transfer of Children’s Basic Gymnastics Skills

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, University of Shahrekord

2 M. Sc. of Motor Behavior, Azad University of Isfahan Branch Khorasgan

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of low contextual interference with high contextual interference on acquisition, retention and transfer of basic gymnastics skills in children with three to six years old. The study population included 52 children three to six years old enrolled in gymnastics school from which 20 children were selected randomly. Jumping skills (open-leg jack, closed-leg jack, pistol) balance skills (simple, stork, angel) and Tumbling forward skills (closed leg, open leg, one leg) were displayed by experienced coach and then they participated in the pre-test. Performing all pre-tests were filmed and, based on total average rating of three official refers, the subjects respectively were replaced in two groups of low contextual interference and high contextual interference(n=10). The low contextual interference group practiced only one of the skills in each session and at the end of the session acquisition post-test was taken and 48 hours later at the start of the next session the post-test of retention and transfer of last session were done and then they practiced the next skill. The high contextual interference group, practiced all the skills for the nine session in each session. At the end of the ninth session, they had acquisition post-test and 48 hours later, the retention and transfer post tests were taken. The data was analyzed by MANCOVA with alpha set at 0.05. Results showed that there were significant differences between the two block and random practice groups in all three skills of balance, jumping and tumbling(P<0.05). Results approved superiority of random practice in gymnastic in children with ages three to six years old and emphasized the effect of type of skill in contextual interference.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. Bagherzadeh F,Sheikh M,Shahbazi M,Tahmasebi SH.Motor control and learning theories and consepts:tehran.bamdad ketab publication;2006.p557. (In Persian)
  2. Giuffrida C G, Shea J B, Fairbrother, J T. Differential transfer benefits of increased practice for constant, blocked, and serial practice schedule. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2002; 34:353 –65.
  3. Magil R A. Motor learning: concept and aplications. Translated by Mk.Vaez Mosavi, M. Shojaie. 6th ed. tehran: bamdad ketab; 2015. p158. (In Persian)
  4. Newell K M. McDonald P V. practice:A search for task soluations. proceedings of the American academy of physical education.1992;51-9.
  5. McDonald P V, Oliver S K, Newell K M. Perceptual-motor exploration as a function of biomechanical and task constraints. Acta Psychologica. 1995; 88 (2): 127-65.
  6. Jenkins J J. Four points to remember: a tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In L. S. Cormak & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory experiments. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1979: P. 226-49.
  7. Shewokis P A. Is the contextual interference effect generalizable to computer games Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1997: 84:3-15
  8. Guadagnoli M A, Holcomb W R, Weber T J. The relationship between contextual interference effects and performer expertise on the learning of a putting task. Journal of Human Movement Studies. 1999; 37:19-36.
  9. Guadagnoli M A & Timothy D Lee. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effect of various practice condition in motor learning. Journal of motor behavior. 2004; 36(2): 212 –9.
  10. Lee T D & Simon D A. Contextual Interference. In A. M. Williams, & N. J. Hodges, (Eds.) Skill Acquisition in Sport: Research, Theory and Practice. 2004; (p. 29-44). London: Routledge.
  11. Schmidt R A, Lee T D. Motor control and learning a behavioral emphasis. Translated by R. Hemayattalab, A. Ghasemi. 1st ed.tehran:Elm av Harekat; 2008. p193. (In Persian)
  12. Hebert E P, Landin D & Solomon M A. Practice Schedule Effects on the Performance and Learning of Low- and High-Skilled Students: An Applied Study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1996; 67:52-8.
  13. Landin D & Hebert E P. A comparesion of three practice schedules along the contexcual interference continuum. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 1997; 68(4): 357-61.
  14. Guadagnoli M A, Lee T D. Challenge Point: A Framework for Conceptualizing the Effects of Various Practice Conditions in Motor Learning. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2004; 36:212-24.
  15. Jarus T & Gutman T. Effects of Cognitive Processes and Task Complexity on Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer of Motor Skills. Canadian journal of occupational therapy. 2001; 68 (5):280 –9.
  16. Guadagnoli M A, Holcomb W R & Weber T J. The Relationship between Contextual Interference Effects and Performer Expertise on the Learning of a Putting Task. Journal of Human Movement Studies. 1999; 37:19-36.
  17. Porter J M, Landin D, Hebert E P & Baum B. The Effects of Three Levels of Contextual Interference on Performance Outcomes and Movement Patterns in Golf Skills. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2007; 2(3): 243-55.
  18. Brady F. A Theoretical and Empirical Review of the Contextual Interference Effect and the Learning of Motor Skills. QUEST. 1998; 50: 266-93.
  19. Hall, K G & Boyle M. The effects of contextual interfrace on shuffle boared skill in children. Research Quarterly for exercise and sport Abestracts. 1993; 64: 74.
  20. Pinto Zipp G & Gentile A M. Practice Schedule and The Learning Of Motor Skills In Children And Adults: Teaching Implications. Journal of College Teaching & Learning. 2010; 7(2): 35-42.
  21. Pollock B J & Lee T D. Dissossated contextual interference effects in children and adualts. percetcual and motor skills. 1997; 84:851-8.
  22. Wulf G. The effect of type of practice on motor learning in children. Applied cognative psychology. 1991; 5:123-34.
  23. Brady F. Contextual interference: A meta-analytic study. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2004; 99:116-26.
  24. Del Rey P, Whitehurst M & Wood J M. Effects of experience and contextual interference on learning and transfer by boys and girls. percepual and motor skills. 1983; 56:581-2.
  25. Pasand F, Fooladiyanzadeh H, Nazemzadegan G. The Effect of Gradual Increase in on Acquisition, Retention and Transfer of Volleyball Skills. International Journal of Kinesiology & Sports Science. 2016; 4(2):72-7.
  26. Saemi E, Porter J M, Ghotbi Varzaneh A, Zarghami M & Shafinia P. Practicing along the contextual interference continuum: A comparison of three practice schedules in an elementary physical education setting. Kineziologija. 2012;44(2): 191-8.
  27. Kalkhoran A F & Shariati A. The Effects of Contextual Interference on Learning Volleyball Motor Skills. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. 2012; 12(4):550.
  28. Porter J M & Saemi E. Moderately skilled learners benefit by practicing with systematic increases in contextual interference. International Journal of Coaching Science. 2010; 4(2):61-71.
  29. Granda J, Barbero Alvarez J C, Montilla Medina M. effects of different peractice condition on Acquisition, Retention and Transfer of soccer skills by 9-year-old school children. Perceptual and Motor Skills.2008; 106:447-60.
  30. Porter J M. systematically increasing contextual interference is beneficial for learning novel motor skills. Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Central Missouri; 2008.
  31. Shea C H, Park J H and Braden H W. Age-related effects in sequential motor learning. Phys. Ther. 2006; 86:478–88.
  32. Granda J, Montilla Medina M. Practice schedule and Acquisition, Retention and Transfer of a throwing task in 6-MI-old childern, Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2003; 96:1015-24.
  33. Smith P J. Applying contextual interference to snowboarding skills. Perceptual and motor skills. 2002; 95(3):999-1005.
  34. Pauwels L, Vancleef K, Swinnen S P and Beets I A M. Challenge to promote change: both young and older adults benefit from contextual interference. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2015;7:157.
  35. Zetou E, Michalopoulo M, Giazitzi K, Kioumourtzoglou E. Contextual Interference effects in learning volleyball skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2007; 104: 995-1004.
  36. Moreno F J, Avila F, Damas J, Garcia J A, Luis V, Reina R, et al. Contextual interference in learning precision skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2003; 97:121-8.
  37. Smith Peter J K, Gregory Suzanne K, Davies M. Alternating versus blocked practice in learning a cartwheel.Perceptrral and Mofor Skills. 2003; 96:1255-64.
  38. Li Y & Lima R P. Rehearsal of task variations and contextual interference effect in a field setting. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2002; 94:750-2.
  39. Meira C M & Tani G. The contextual interference effect in acquisition of dart-throwing skill tested on a transfer test with extended trials. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2001; 92:910-8.
Motor Behavior
Volume 10, Issue 31
Spring 2018
May 2018
Pages 161-176
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 31 October 2016
  • Revise Date: 06 April 2017
  • Accept Date: 21 May 2017
Share
How to cite
Statistics