رفتار حرکتی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

هزینه های دریافت نشریه

راهنمای نویسندگان

فرم ها

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

نقش کینماتیک‌های شنیداری حرکت در بازتولید و یادگیری مشخصات فضایی الگوی حرکت

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه علوم ورزشی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه دامغان، دامغان، ایران

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی اثر سانیفیکیشن حرکت (تبدیل مشخصات کینماتیک یا کینتیک حرکت به صدا) همراه با الگوی بینایی بر بازتولید و یادگیری مشخصات فضایی الگوی حرکت بود. تعداد 30 آزمودنی به‌صورت دردسترس انتخاب شدند و به‌صورت تصادفی در سه گروه الگودهی بینایی، الگودهی بینایی–شنوایی (تک‌کانالی) و الگودهی بینایی-شنوایی (دوکانالی) قرار گرفتند.افراد در گروه بینایی، الگوی پرتاب آزاد بسکتبال فرد ماهری را تماشا می‌کردند و افراد در گروه‌های بینایی–شنوایی، هم‌زمان با الگوی بینایی، سرعت زاویه‌ای مفصل آرنج (گروه تک‌کانالی) و سرعت زاویه‌ای مفاصل آرنج و مچ (گروه دوکانالی) را به‌صورت سانیفیکیشن دریافت می‌کردند. در مرحلة اول، الگوی موردنظر پنج مرتبه ارائه شد و بلافاصله پس از هر بار، هر سه گروه مشابه با الگو را اجرا کردند (بازتولید). سپس، گروه‌ها در مراحل پیش‌آزمون، اکتساب (چهار جلسه، 160 کوشش) و یادداری (48 ساعت بعد) شرکت کردند. در همة مراحل، الگوی سرعت زاویه‌ای و مسافت زاویه‌ای مفاصل آرنج و مچ افراد بر الگوی فرد ماهر منطبق شد و ریشة میانگین مجذور خطا محاسبه شد. درنهایت، سه خطا شامل خطای فضایی سرعت زاویه‌ای، خطای فضایی مسافت زاویه‌ای و خطای حداکثر دامنۀ حرکتی فلشکن مفاصل آرنج و مچ به‌دست آمد. نتایج نشان داد که در مرحلة بازتولید، در متغیر خطای فضایی سرعت زاویه‌ای (P = 0.042) و در آزمون‌های اکتساب و یادداری، در هر سه خطای ذکرشده بین گروه‌ها تفاوت معناداری به نفع گروه‌های دو حسی وجود دارد (P < 0.05). نتایج این پژوهش بر نقش مهم کینماتیک‌های شنیداری حرکت در متغیرهای فضایی الگوی حرکت و عملکرد نهایی افراد تأکید می‌کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Motor-Auditory Kinematics in Reproduction and Learning the Spatial Characteristics of the Motion Pattern

نویسنده [English]

  • Hesam Ramezanzade

Assisstant Professor, Department of Sport Sciences, School of Humanities, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran

چکیده [English]

This study has investigated the role of movement sonification (conversion of the human kinetic or kinematic characteristics into auditory patterns) along with the visual pattern in reproduction and learning the spatial characteristics of the motion pattern. 30 subjects were randomly divided three groups which are visual, visual-auditory (one channel) and visual-auditory (two channel). Visual groups watched the pattern of skilled basketball player and other groups watched this pattern and simultaneously heard elbow angular velocity (one channel groups) and elbow and wrist angular velocity (two channel groups) as sonification. At the first stage, the pattern was presented to subjects five times and they performed the pattern after watching it (reproduction). Then, the groups participated in the stages of pre-test, acquisition (4 sessions, 160 tries) and retention (after 48 hours). In all stages, the angular velocity pattern and angular distance pattern of the elbow and wrist joints of the individuals coincided to the pattern of the skilled performer. After that, by calculating the root mean square error, the inconsistency was considered as the spatial error of angular distance and spatial error of angular velocity. Furthermore, the maximum range error of flexion was calculated. The results showed that in reproduction stage (in the spatial error of angular velocity) and in both acquisition and retention test (considering all variables) there was significant difference between groups in favor of audio-visual group. These results emphasize the salient role of motor-auditory kinematics on spatial variables of motion patterns and the final performance of the subjects.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Sonification
  • Visual-Auditory Modeling
  • Spatial Error of Motion Pattern
  • Basketball Jump Shot
مراجع
  1. Herman T, Hunt A, Neuhoff G. The Sonification Handbook. Berlin: Logos Publishing House; 2011. p. 547-9.
  2. Sors F, Murgia M, Santoro I, Agostini T. Audio-based interventions in sport. Open Psychol J. 2015; 8(3): 212-9.
  3. Doody SG, Bird AM, Ross D. The effect of auditory and visual models on acquisition of a timing task. Hum Mov Sci. 1985;4(4):2710-81.
  4. Lai Q, Shea CH, Little M. Effects of modeled auditory information on a sequential timing task. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000;71(4):349-56.
  5. Grondin S, McAuley JD. Duration discrimination in crossmodal sequences. Perception. 2009;38(10):1542-59.
  6. Repp BH, Penel A. Auditory dominance in temporal processing: New evidence from synchronization with simultaneous visual and auditory sequences. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002;28(5):1085-99.
  7. Repp BH, Penel A. Rhythmic movement is attracted more strongly to auditory than to visual rhythms. Psychol Res. 2004;68(4):252-70.
  8. Lai Q, Shea C H, Bruechert L, Little M. Auditory model enhances relative-timing learning. J Mot Behav. 2002;34(3):299-307.
  9. Chen JL, Penhune VB, Zatorre RJ. Listening to musical rhythms recruits motor regions of the brain. Cereb Cortex. 2008;18(12):2844-54.
  10. Fujioka T, Trainor LJ, Large EW, Ross B. Internalized timing of isochronous sounds is represented in neuromagnetic beta oscillations. J Neurosci. 2012;32(5):1791-802.
  11. Bangtsson SL, Ullen F, Ehrsson HH, Hashimoto T, Kito T, Naito E, et al. Listening to rhythms activates motor and premotor cortices. Cortex. 2009;45(1):62-71.
  12. Pizzamiglio L, Aprile T, Spitoni G, Pitzalis S, Bates E, D'Amico S, et al. Separate neural systems for processing action- or non-action-related sounds. NeuroImage. 2005;24(3):852-61.
  13. McDonald JJ, Teder-Salejarvi WA, Heraldez D, Hillyard SA. Electrophysiological evidence for the ‘missing link’ in crossmodal attention. Canad. J. Exper. Psychol. 2001;55(2):141–9.
  14. Keller JM, Prather EE, Boynton WV, Enos HL, Jones LV, Pompea SM, et al. Educational testing of an auditory display regarding seasonal variation of Martian polar ice caps. Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display; 7-9 July 2003; Boston: International Community on Auditory Display; 2003. P.212-‌5.
  15. Barraclough NE, Xiao D, Baker CI, Oram MW, Perrett DI. Integration of visual and auditory information by superior temporal sulcus neurons responsive to the sight of actions. J.Cogn. Neurosci. 2005;17(3):377-91.
  16. Bidet-Caulet A, Voisin J, Bertrand O, Fonlupt P. Listening to a walking human activates the temporal biological motion area. Neuroimage. 2005;28(1):132-9.
  17. Mendonca C, Santos J A, Lopez-Molnier J. The benefit of multisensory integration with biological motion signals. Exp. Brain Res. 2011;213(2-3):185-92.
  18. Kaiser R, Medeiros CB, Wanderley MM, Schonwiesner M. The effect of movement complexity on perceived audiovisual synchronicity. Journal of Vision. 2014;14(10):10-6.
  19. Effenberg, AO. (2005). Movement sonification: Effects on perception and action. IEEE MultiMedia. 2005;12(2):53-9.
  20. Schmidt G, Mohammadi B, Hammer A, Heldmann M, Samii A, Munte TF, Effenberg AO. Observation of sonified movements engages a basal ganglia frontocortical network. Neurosci. 2013;14(1):14-32.
  21. Schmidt G, Effenberg AO. Perceptual effects of auditory information about own and other movements. Proceedings of the 18th Internatinal Conference on Auditory Display; June 2012; Atlanta, USA; 2012. p. 89-94.
  22. Ramezanzade H, Abdoli B, Farsi A, Sanjari MA. The effect of sonification modelling on perception and accuracy of performing jump shot basketball. Int J Sport Stud. 2014;4(11):1388-92.
  23. Ramezanzade H, Abdoli B, Farsi A, Sanjari M A. Perception-action transfer: The role of audiovisual integration. Mot Behav. 2017; 8(26):35-56. (In Persian).
  24. Effenberg AO. Movement sonification: Motion perception, behavioral effects and functional data. Proceedings og the 2nd Internatioanl Workshop on Interactive Sonification; 3 February 2007; York, UK; 2007. p. 1-4.
  25. Effenberg A, Feshe U, Weber A. Movement sonification: Audiovisual benefits on motor learning. BIO Web of Conferences, 15 Decamber 2011; Berlin: EDP Scinences; 2011. P. 1-5.
  26. Ramezanzade H, Abdoli B, Farsi A, Sanjari M A. (2015). The effect of audiovisual integration on performance accuracy and learning in motor task. J Res Rehabil Sci. 2015;11(1):1-10. (In persian).
  27. Effenberg AO, Fehse U, Schmitz G, Krueger B, Mechling H. Movement sonification: Effects on motor learning beyond rhythmic. Front Neurosci. 2016; 10(1):219-49.
  28. Chollet D, Madani M, Micallef J P. Effects of two types of biomechanical bio-feedback on crawl performance. In: MacLaren D, Reilly T, Lees A, editors. Biomechanics and medicine in swimming. Swimming science VI. London: E & F Spon; 1992. p. 48-53.
  29. Schaffert N, Mattes K, Effenberg A. An investigation of online acoustic information for elite rowers in on-water training conditions. J Hum Sport Exerc. 2011; 6(2):      392-405.
  30. Agostini T, Righi G, Galmonte A, Bruno P.The relevance of auditory information in optimizing hammer throwers performance. In: Pascolo PB, Ed. Biomechanics and Sports. Vienna, Austria; 2004. p. 67-74.
  31. Galmonte A, Righi G, Agostini T. Stimoli acustici come nuovo elemento per il miglioramento della performance nel nuoto. Movimento. 2004; 20:73-8.
  32. Murgia M, Hohmann T, Galmonte A, Raab M, Agostini T.Recognising one’s own motor actions through sound: the role of temporal factors. Perception. 2012;41(8):976-87.
  33. Yamamoto G, Shiraki K, Takahata M, Sakane Y, Takebayash Y. Multimodal knowledge for designing new sound environments. Workshop on Mobile HCI and Sound;January 2004. p. 31-6.
  34. Kirby R. Development of a real-time performance measurement and feedback system for alpine skiers. Sports Technol. 2009;2(1):43-52.
  35. Ramezanzade H, Abdoli B, Farsi A, Sanjari M A. The effect of sonification of visual modeling on relative timing: The role in motor learning. Acta Kinesiologica. 2017; 11:17-27.
  36. Secoli R, Milot M, Rosati G, Reinkensmeyer D. Effect of visual distraction and auditory feedback on patient effort during robot-assisted movement training after stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011; 8(1):1–10.
  37. Welch RB, Warren DH. Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychol Bull. 1980; 88(3):638–67.
  38. Rojas F J, Cepero M, Gutierrez M. Kinematic adjustments in the basketball jump shot against an opponent. Ergonomices. 2000;43(10):1651-60.
  39. Hommel B, Müsseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W. The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behav Brain Sci. 2001; 24(5):    849–78.
  40. Lahav A, Saltzman E, Schlaug G. Action representation of sound: Audiomotor recognition network while listening to newly acquired actions. Journal of Neurosci. 2007; 27(2):308-14.
  41. Stanley C, Lawrence M, James TE. Sensation and perception. Trans Goodarzi, A. Tehran: Samt; 2011
  42. Frassinetti F, Bolognini N, Làdavas E. Enhancement of visual perception by crossmodal visuo-auditory interaction. Exp Brain Res. 2002;147(3):332–43.
  43. Seitz AR, Kim R, Shams L. Sound facilitates visual learning. Curr Biol. 2006;16(14):1422–7.
  44. Chiari L, Dozza M, Cappello A, Horak F B, Macellari V, Giansanti D. Audio-Biofeedback for Balance improvements: An Accelerometry-Based System. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 2005;52(12):2108–11.
  45. Rath M, Rocchesso D. Continuous sonic feedback from a rolling ball. IEEE Multimed, Special Issue Interactive Sonification. 2005;12(2):60–9.
  46. Lotfi M, Mohammadzade H, Sohrabi M. Effects of virtual reality and reality training with and without auditory information limitation on motor learning table tennis forehand. Mot Behav. 2017; 9(28):89-108. (In Persian).
  47. Shea CH, Wulf G, Park J H, Gaunt B. Effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing. J Mot Behav. 2001;33(2):127-38.
  48. Kennedy D M, Boyle J B, Shea CH. The role of auditory and visual models in the production of bimanual tapping patterns. Exp Brain Res. 2013;224(4):507-18.
  49. Baudry L, Leroy D, Thouvarecq R, Chollet D. Auditory concurrent feedback benefits on the circle performed in gymnastics. J Sport Sci. 2006;24(2):149-56.
  50. Effenberg AO, Schmitz G, Baumann F, Rosenhahn B, Kroeger D. Sound script supporting the acquisition of character writing by multisensory integration. Open Psychol J. 2015;8(1):230-7.
  51. Danna J, Fontaine M, Paz-Villagran V, Gondre C, Thoret E, Aramaki M., et al. The effect of real-time auditory feedback on learning new characters. Hum Mov Sci. 2015;43(1):216–88.
  52. Fazeli D, Farsi A R, Abdoli B. Effect of observing different kinds of information during observational learning. Mot Behav. 2016; 8(24):17-38. (In Persian).
  53. Adams JA. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. J Mot Behav. 1971; 3:111-50.
  54. Lee TD, Swinnen SP, Serrien DJ. Cognitive effort and motor learning. Quest. 1994; 46: 328–44.
  55. Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effect of various practice condition in motor learning. J mot behav. 2004; 36(2):       212-24.
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 10، شماره 33
پاییز 1397
مهر 1397
صفحه 125-148
فایل ها
سابقه مقاله
  • تاریخ دریافت: 16 بهمن 1396
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 06 اردیبهشت 1397
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 15 اردیبهشت 1397
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار