تأثیر جفت‌شدگی ویژگی شخصیتی رقابت‌جویی و غیررقابت‌جویی و محیط تمرینی در تمرین مشاهده‌ای بر یادگیری پرتاب دارت

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی‌ارشد یادگیری و کنترل حرکتی، دانشگاه اصفهان

2 استادیار رفتار حرکتی و مدیریت ورزشی، دانشگاه اصفهان

3 استاد رفتار حرکتی و مدیریت ورزشی، دانشگاه اصفهان

چکیده

هدف از انجام این پژوهش، تعیین تأثیر جفت شدگی ویژگی شخصیتی رقابت‌جویی و غیررقابت‌جویی ومحیط تمرینی در تمرین مشاهده­ای بر اکتساب، یادداری و انتقال پرتاب دارت بود. تعداد 60 دانش‌آموز دختر مقطع متوسطه با دامنة سنی 12 تا 15 سال به روش نمونه‌گیری دردسترس انتخاب شدند و براساس امتیاز کسب‌شده از پرسش‌نامة سوگیری ورزشی گیل و دیتر (1988) در چهار گروه رقابت‌جو و غیررقابت‌جو با تمرین مشاهده‌ای محیط رقابتی و نیز رقابت‌جو و غیررقابت‌جو با تمرین مشاهده‌ای محیط غیر رقابتی قرار گرفتند. پس از پیش‌آزمون، آزمودنی‌ها به‌مدت چهار هفته، هر هفته دو جلسه و در هرجلسه دو بار به مشاهدة محیط‌های موردنظر پرداختند.بلافاصله پس از اتمام دورة تمرین، از هر چهار گروه آزمون یادداری فوری و یک هفته پس از آن، آزمون یادداری تأخیری و انتقال گرفته شد. داده‌ها با آزمون تحلیل کوواریانس تحلیل شدند. نتایج نشان داد که در مرحلة یادداری و انتقال، در محیط رقابتی و غیررقابتی تفاوت معناداری بین ورزشکاران گروه رقابت‌جو و غیررقابت‌جو وجود داشت و میانگین امتیاز پرتاب دارت در آزمودنی‌های با ویژگی شخصیتی همسان با محیط بیشتر بود. براساس دیدگاه تعاملی، وقتی سطح رقابت‌جویی افراد با سطح رقابت محیط تمرین در تعامل مثبت و صحیحی قرار می‌گیرد، بهترین سطح عملکرد را از خود نشان می‌دهند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Pairing the Personality Characteristic of Competitiveness, Non-Competitiveness and Training Environment in Observational Practice on Learning of Dart Throwing

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mehrangiz Khaksar Boldaji 1
  • Mehdi Rafeii Boroujeni 2
  • Ahmad Reza Movahedi 3
1 M.Sc. of Motor Learning and Control, University of Isfahan
2 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior and Sport Management, University of Isfahan
3 Professor of Motor Behavior and Sport Management, University of Isfahan
چکیده [English]

The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of pairing the personality characteristic of competitiveness, non-competitiveness and training environment in observational practice on acquisition, retention and transference of dart throwing. 60 girl students of ninth grade in high school in age range of 12-15 years were selected by accessible sampling and based on their scores in Gill and Deeter Sports Orientation Questionnaire. They were put in four groups of competitive with observational practice of competition environment, competitive with observational practice of non-competition environment, non-competitive with observational practice of competition environment and non-competitive with observational practice of non-competition environment. After pretest subjects practiced four weeks and two sessions held in every week (two observations for each session) of the intended environments. Immediately after the observational practice period, acquisition test was performed for all four groups. The delayed retention and transference phases were a week after acquisition. The data was analyzed using a data covariance analysis method. There were significant differences between competitiveness and non-competitiveness subjects in competitive and noncompetitive environment in retention and transfer tests. The mean of scores were better in subjects with the same personality characteristics with environment situation. According to interaction view, when the level of competitiveness and exercise environment competition level are in a correct and positive interaction, the best level of performance will be achieved.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • observational practice
  • competitive environment
  • non-competitive environment
  • Competitiveness and Non-Competitiveness Trait
  1. Black CB, Wright DL. Can observational practice facilitate error recognition and movement production?. Res Quar for Exer and Sport. 2000;71(4):331-9.
  2. Brymer E, Renshaw I. An introduction to the constraints-led approach to learning in outdoor education. Aus J of Outd Edu. 2010;14(2):33-41.
  3. Gallahue DL, Ozmun JC, Goodway J. Understanding motor development: Infants, children, adolescents, adults. Boston: Mcgraw-hill; 2006. Chapter.13: 267-74.
  4. Gill D, Williams L, Reifsteck E. Psychological dynamics of sport and exercise. Fourth Edi. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2017. P 182-4.
  5. Sage GH. Motor learning and control: A neuropsychological approach. Trans  Mortazavi H. Tehran: Sonbole Publication; 1984. P 98-102. (In Persian).
  6. Bird AM, Bernette K. Psychology and sport behavior. Trans Mortazavi H. Tehran: Physical Education Organization Publication; 1985. P 231-35. (In Persian).
  7. Weinberg RS, Gould D. Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. 6th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2014. P 302-42.
  8. Habibi A, Movahedi AR, Nezakatalhosseini M, Jalali Sh, Moradi J. Pairing the personality characteristic of competitiveness and practice type on learning of a sport skill. J of Sport Motor Learn and Develop. 2010;5:117-34. (In Persian).
  9. Sambolec EJ, Kerr NL, Messé LA. The role of competitiveness at social tasks: Can indirect cues enhance performance?. J of App Sport Psych. 2007; 19(2):160-72.
  10. Mokhtari P, Shojai M, Dana A. The effect of observational practice on the badminton volley service learning: The role of self–efficacy. Harakat. 2007;32:117-32. (In Persian).
  11. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human kinetics; 2005.
  12. Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. Effects of the model’s handedness and observer’s viewpoint on observational learning. Exp Brain Res. 2011; 214(4):567-76.
  13. Vogt S, Thomaschke R. From visuo-motor interactions to imitation learning: Behavioural and brain imaging studies. J of Sport Sci. 2007;25(5):497-517.
  14. Shea CH, Wright DL, Wulf G, Whitacre C. Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. J of Motor Beh. 2000;32(1):27-36.
  15. Shafizadeh, M. The effect of type of attractiveness of observational model on learning of dart throw: The effect of self-efficacy. Res in Sport Sci. 2008;22:13-23. (In Persian).
  16. Dana A, Fallah Z, Rezai R, Jahani H. The effects of an observational practice period on learning of valley badminton service. Aus J of Basic and Appl scie. 2011;5(11):1112-6.
  17.  Rizzolatti G, Craighero L. The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004;27:169-92.
  18. Ebdalifar A, Behpour N, Shirazi SM. The effects of competitiveness type and audience on learning of a badminton short service motor skill. J of Novel Appl Sci. 2015;4(5):566-72.
  19. Movahedi, A. Sheikh, M. Bagherzade, F. Hemayattalab, R. Ashayery. H. A practice specificity–based model of arousal for achieving peak performance. J of Motor Beh. 2007;39)6(:457-62. (In Persian).
  20. Singer RN, Hansenblas HA, Janelle CM. Handbook of sport psychology. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2001. P. 205-33.
  21. Black CB. The effect of task structure, practice schedule, and model type on the learning of relative and absolute timing by physical and observational practice [Doctoral dissertation]: [Texas]. Texas A & M University; 2004.
  22. Gill DL, Deeter TE. Development of the sport orientation Questionnaire. Res Quar for Exe and Sport. 1988; 59: 191-202.
  23. Bahram A, Shafizadeh M. Effect of competitiveness and type of sport on sport participation: study of interactive model of motivation for sport improvement. Sport and Move Sci. 2003;1(2):1-9.
  24. McCullagh P, Weiss MR. Modeling: Considerations for motor skill performance and psychological responses. In Singer RN, Hausenblas HA, Janelle CM, editors, Handbook of sport psychology. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley. 2001. P. 205-38
  25. Adams D. The relative effectiveness of three instructional strategies on the learning of an overarm throw for force. Physi Edu. 2001;58(2):67-78.
  26. Shea CH, Wright DL, Wulf G, Whitacre C. Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. J of Motor Beh. 2000;32(1):27-36.
  27. Maleki F. The comparison of three type of observational instruction on acquisition and retention of a sport skill. J of Motor Beha and Sport Psych. 2010;7:31-44. (In Persian).
  28. Hergenhahn BR, Olsom M. An introduction to theories of learning. Trans Seif AA. Tehran: Nashre Doran Publication; 2007. P 56, 123, 211. (In Persian)  
  29. Courneya KS, Carron AV. The home advantage in sport competitions: A literature review. J of Sport and Exe Psych. 1992;14(1):13-27.
  30. Magil RA. Motor learning from concept to application. Tehran. Hananeh Publication; 2004. P 286. (In Persian).  
  31. Farrow D, Pyne D, Gabbett T. Skill and physiological demands of open and closed training drills in Australian football. Inter J of Sport Sci & Coach. 2008;3(4):489-99.
  32. Liu W. Field dependence-independence and sports with a preponderance of closed or open skill. J of Sport Beh. 2003;26(3):285-97.
  33. Huang CY. The effects of cooperative learning and model demonstration strategies on motor skill performance during video instruction. Procee Natio Sci Counc. 2000;2:255-68.
  34. Lago-Rodríguez A, Cheeran B, Koch G, Hortobagy T, Fernandez-del-Olmo M. The role of mirror neurons in observational motor learning: An integrative review. Euro J of Hum Move. 2014;32:82-103.
  35. Kawasaki T, Aramaki H, Tozawa R. An effective model for observational learning to improve novel motor performance. J of Physic Ther Sci. 2015;27(12):3829-32.
  36. Zmyj N, Aschersleben G, Prinz W, Daum M. The peer model advantage in infants’ imitation of familiar gestures performed by differently aged models. Fronti in Psych. 2012; 3:252-9.
  37. Calvo-Merino B, Grèzes J, Glaser DE, Passingham RE, Haggard P. Seeing or doing? Influence of visual and motor familiarity in action observation. Curr Biol. 2006;16(19):1905-10.