رفتار حرکتی

بررسی میزان یادگیری ایروبیک در دانشجویان کم‌تحرک با توجه به سبک‌های شناختی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی‌ارشد روان‌شناسی ورزشی، دانشگاه تبریز

2 دانشیار رفتارحرکتی، دانشگاه تبریز

3 استادیار رفتارحرکتی، دانشگاه تبریز

چکیده
هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی میزان یادگیری ایروبیک در دانشجویان کم‌تحرک با توجه به سبک‌های شناختی بود. بدین‌منظور، 24 دانشجوی کم‌تحرک دختر با میانگین سنی (3/22 و انحراف استاندارد 187/1 به شیوة دردسترس انتخاب شدند و در سه گروه سبک شناختی (هر گروه هشت نفر) قرار گرفتند. هر سه گروه به‌مدت 16 جلسة یک‌ساعتی تحت‌‌آموزش ایروبیک ماراتن قرار گرفتند و سه مربی ایروبیک میزان یادگیری آن‌ها را ارزیابی کردند. داده‌ها به کمک روش آماری تحلیل واریانس (اندازه‌گیری مکرر) بررسی شدند. نتایج نشان داد که شرکت‌کنندگان مستقل از زمینه (P = 0.09) در مقایسه با شرکت‌کنندگان وابسته به زمینه و بی‌طرف در مراحل یادداری و انتقال عملکرد بهتری داشتند و میزان یادگیری آن‌ها بیشتر از دو گروه دیگر بود. می‌توان نتیجه گرفت که شرکت‌کنندگان مستقل از زمینه به‌دلیل پردازش خودکار، استفادة مؤثر از اطلاعات بدنی و عوامل شناختی متفاوت ممکن است مهارت‌های حرکتی را سریع‌تر یاد بگیرند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Assessment of Sedentary Student Aerobics Learning According to Cognitive Styles

نویسندگان English

  • Fariba Mollaei Zangi 1
  • Mahta Eskandarnejad 2
  • Zahra Fathi Rezaei 3
1 M.Sc. of Sport Psychology, University of Tabriz
2 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, University of Tabriz
3 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, University of Tabriz
چکیده English

The purpose of present study was to Assessment of sedentary student aerobics Learning according to cognitive styles. For this aim, 24 sedentary female students with age average (22.37) and standard deviation (1.187) were selected and divide to three groups of cognitive styles (each group 8 members). All three groups were under aerobics marathon training for 16 one-hour sessions. And learning of them were evaluated by three aerobics instructor. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (repeated measure). The results show field Independent participants have better performance (P = 0.09) compared to field dependent and nature. And their learning are more than the other two groups. So, it can be concluded field Independent participants for automatic processing, effective use of physical information and different cognitive factors may learn faster motor skills.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Aerobics
  • Learning
  • Cognitive Styles
  1. Farhadinia H. The relationship between spatial ability and cognitive style [Unpublished mster’s thesis]. [Tehran]: Kharazmi University; 2012. (In Persian).
  2. Rahmaninia F. Foundations and application of motor learning. Tehran: Bamdad Ketab; 2011. 175-6. (In Persian).
  3. Rahmaninia F. Sport physiology. 2th ed. Tehran: Bamdad Ketab; 2005. 21-49. (In Persian).
  4. Oxendine JB. Psychology and motor learning. New York: Appleton-century crofts; 1967.
  5. Witkin HA, Oltman P, Raskin E, Karp S. A manual for the embedded figures test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1971.
  6. Azadi M. Academic achievement and teaching methods in students' cognitive style independent/dependent on context. Iran psychologist quarterly. 2008;5(18):119-26. (In Persian).
  7. Tennant M. Psychology and adult learning. London: Psychology Press; 1997.
  8. Borich GD, Tombari NL. Educational psychology. New York: Hurper Collins College Publishers; 1995.
  9. Agahi Esfahani B, Neshat Doost HT, Naeli H. The relationship between cognitive style field dependence independence and creativity. Psychology magazine. 2006;10(2):37-51. (In Persian).
  10. Palladino P, Poli P, Masi G, Marcheschi M. Impulsive reflective cognitive style and emotion in adolescence. Percept Mot Skills. 1997;84(1-2):47-57.
  11. Safaripour F. Check the interaction of gender and cognitive styles (field dependent and field independence) in academic achievement in both math and social sciences in the number of student thirds of school [Unpublished master’s thesis]. [Shiraz]: Shiraz University; 2001. (In Persian).
  12. Liu WH. Field dependence-independence and sports with a preponderance of closed or open skill. J of Sport Behav. 2003;26:285-97.
  13. Liu WH, Chepyator-Thomson JR. Field dependence-independence and physical activity engagement among middle school students. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2009;14(2):125-36.
  14. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning. Trans Hemayattalab R, Ghasemi A. Tehran. Publication of Science and Motion; 2005. P. 44.
  15. Yan, JH. Cognitive styles affect choice response time and accuracy. Pers Individ Dif. 2010;48:747-51.
  16. Guillot A, Collet C. Field dependence-independence in complex motor skills. Percept Mot Skills. 2004;98:575-83.
  17. Qutbi A, Zargami M, Saemi E, Maleki F. The impact on the accuracy of cognitive styles, the role of working memory. Growth and learning sports-motion magazine. 2012;10:61-78. (In Persian).
  18. Bahrami A, Qutbi A, Saemi E. Evaluation of accuracy in indoor and outdoor environments approach to cognitive styles. Motor Behavior. 2013;5(13):77-94. (In Persian).
  19. Akbari H. The effect of cognitive style on learning a task aimed at open and closed environments with classic fuzzy logic approach [Unpublished master’s thesis]. [Tehran]: Azad University of Tehran; 2013. (In Persian).
  20. Fitts PM, Posner MI. Human performance. Brooks Coole Oregon, Belmont. 1967; 17-20.
  21. Gentile AM. A working model of skills acquisition with application to teaching. Quest. 1972;(1):3–23.
  22. Liu WH. Field dependence-independence and participation in physical activity by college students. Percept Mot Skills. 2006;102:806-14.
  23. Behzadnia B. Comparison of aerobic and hip-hop exercises on psychological well-being of male students. Unpablished Thesis. Birjandd University. 2010. (In Persian).
  24. Fathirezaie Z, Farsi A, Vaez Mousavi M K, Zamani Sani Sh. Effect of cognitive training on efficiency of executive control network of attention. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2015; 11(3): 160-78. (In Persian).
  25. Abdoli B, Farsi A, Ekradi M. The effect of exercise on learning behavior and decision forehand table tennis skills. Olympic magazine. 2011;19(4):25-35. (In Persian).
  26. Moosavi Z. Independence perceptual field dependence on skilled and semi-skilled athletes compared with ordinary people [Unpublished master’s thesis]. [Isfahan]: Isfahan University; 1999. (In Persian).
  27. Schmidt RA. Motor learning and performance. 4th ed. Tehran: SAMT Publication; 2002.
  28. Eskandarnejad, M. Ashkriz N, Samadi B. The Aerobics and steppe step by step training. Tabriz: Akhtar Press; 2018. 196-200. (In Persian).
  29. Eskandarnejad M. Help and teach basic movements of Aerobics. Tabriz: Akhtar Press; 2015. P. 10 (In Persian).
  30. Ghaffarzadeh S, Shafinia P, Shetab N, Qutbi A. Compare the visual and auditory simple reaction time and choice in field dependent and independent cognitive styles. Journal of Sport Management and motor behavior. 2013;9(17):131-42. (In Persian).
  31. Namvar AR, Qutbi A, Bahrami A, Eslamjoo M. Related differences in cognitive styles on the implementation of Islam Kalashnikov shooting. Paper presented at: Sixth Congress of Physical Education Students; 2011; December 24-5. Iran. Tehran. (In Persian).
  32. Woolfolk AE. Educational psychology. 10th ed. Boston: Pearson; 2007.
  33. Adib. Y, Rezaei. A, Sobhilaleh. S. A study of the relationship between the cognitive styles (Field dependence & Field intendance) with learning and the studying methods among the third grade theoretical high-school female students in Tabriz in 2010-2011. Journal of Educational Sciences. 2012; 5(20): 77-92.
  34. Liu WH. Chepyator-Thomson JR. Associations among field dependence independence, sports participation, and physical activity level among school children. J Sport Behav. 2008;31(2):130-46.
  35. Ennis CD, Lazarus JC. Cognitive style and gender differences in children's motor task performance. Early Child Dev Care. 2000;6(4):33-46.
  36. Bahar M, Hansell M. The relationship between some psychological factors and their effect on the performance of grid questions and word association tests. Educ Psychol (Lond). 2000;20(3):349–64.
  37. Richardson JA, Turner TE. Field dependence revisited I: Intelligence. Educ Psychol (Lond). 2000;20(3):255-70.
  38. Dassonville P, Walter E, Lunger K. Illusions of space, field dependence and the efficiency of working memory. J Vis. 2006;6(6):1-11.
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 11، شماره 35
فروردین 1398
صفحه 49-62

  • تاریخ دریافت 15 آذر 1395
  • تاریخ بازنگری 10 مرداد 1396
  • تاریخ پذیرش 28 مرداد 1396

صفحه اصلی

داوران

ارسال مقاله

اصول اخلاقی

اخبار و اعلانات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تماس با ما