Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1 Associate Professor of Motor Behavior, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University
2 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University
3 M.Sc. in Motor Behavior, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to determine the effect of the model’s skill level and frequency of feedback on learning a simple serial aiming task. For this purpose, 48 female students aged 19 to 25 years old were selected as the sample. Based on pre-test movement times, they were divided into four groups of 12 subjects (expert model and 100% feedback, expert model and 50% feedback, novice model and 100% feedback, and novice model and 50% feedback). In the acquisition phase, the groups performed the serial aiming task 80 times according to specific instructions. The immediate retention test was conducted 15 minutes after completion of the acquisition phase, and the delayed retention test was conducted 24 hours later. The results of mixed analysis of variance with repeated measures on training blocks in the acquisition phase showed that the main effect of the model in both variables of movement time and spatial error were significant, and expert model observer groups had longer movement times and fewer spatial errors than other groups. The results of two-way analysis of variance in the immediate and delayed retention tests indicated that in both variables of movement time and spatial error, the main effect of the model is significant, but the main effect of the frequency of feedback is not meaningful. Comparing the means showed that the expert model observer groups had longer movement times and fewer spatial errors than other groups that observed novice models.
Keywords
2. Dean N. Observational learning of a bimanual coordination task: Understanding movement feature extraction, model performance level, and perspective angle [Doctoral dissertation]. [Texas]: A&M University; 2009.
3. Olson MH, Hergenhan BR. An introduction to theories of learnin. 8th ed. US: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2012. p. 373.
4. Hebert EP, Landin D. Effects of a learning model and augmented feedback on tennis acquisition. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1994;65(3):250-7.
5. Martens R, Hurwitz L, Zuckerman J. Modelling effects on motor performance. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1976; 47:277ـ91.
6. Want SC, Harris PL. learning from other peoples' mistakes: Casual understanding in learning to use a tool. Child Dev. 2001; 27:431ـ43.
7. Schmidt RA, Lee TD, Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. 5th ed. Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics; 2011. p. 408.
8. Maslovat D, Hodges NJ, Krigolson OE, Handy TC. Observational practice benefits are limited to perceptual improvements in the acquisition of a novel coordination skill. Exp Brain Res. 2010;204(1):119-30.
9. Ste-Marie DM, Law B, Rymal AM, Jenny O, Hall C, McCullagh P. Observation interventions for motor skill learning and performance: An applied model for the use of observation. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2012; 5:145–76.
10. Lago-Rodríguez A, Cheeran B, Koch G. The role of mirror neurons in observational motor learning: An integrative review. Eur J Hum Mov. 2014; 32:82–103.
11. Hodges NJ, Williams AM, Hayes SJ, Breslin G. What is modeled during observational learning? J Sports Sci. 2007; 25:531–45.
12. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986. pp. 512-35.
13. Bandura A. Social learning theory. London: Chapman & Hall; 1993. p. 10.
14. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Observational learning: Tell beginners what they are about to watch and they will learn better. Front Psychol. 2016; 7(51): 1-9. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00051.
15. Ossmy O, Mukamel R. Activity in superior parietal cortex during training by observation predicts asymmetric learning levels across hands. Sci Rep. 2016;(6):321-33.
16. Lotfi Gh, Mohammadpour M. The effect of three models of observational learning ok acquisition and learning of archeyʼs skill in novice boy adolescents. Int J Sport Stud. 2014; 4(4):480-6.
17. Ghorbani S, Bund A. Observational learning of a new motor skill: The effect of different model demonstrations. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching. 2016; 11(4):514-22.
18. Landers DM, Landers DM. Teacher versus peer models, effects of model’s presence and performance level on motor behavior. J Mot Behav. 1973;5(3):129ـ39.
19. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Mixed observation favors motor learning through better estimation of the model’s performance. Exp Brain Res. 2014; 232(10):3121-32.
20. Pollock BJ, Lee TD. The effect of model’s skill level on observational motor learning. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1992; 63:9-25.
21. Hatami F, Tahmasbi F, Sheikhi S. The effects of model skill level on Mu rhythm suppression in Basketball lay-up shot. Motor Behavior. 2017; 28:141-54. (In Persian).
22. Al-Abood SA, Davids K, Bennett SJ. Specificity of task constraints and effects of visual demonstrations and verbal instructions in directing learners' search during skill acquisition. J Mot Behav. 2001;33(3):295-305.
23. Buchanan JJ, Dean NJ. Specificity in practice benefits learning in novice models and variability in demonstration benefits observational practice. Psychol Res. 2010;74(3):313-26.
24. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Observation learning of motor task: Who and when. Exp Brain Res. 2013; 229:125-37.
25. Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. Learning through observation: A combination of expert and novice models favors learning. Exp Brain Res. 2011; 215:183-97.
26. Khadem Mozafari M. The effect of types of augmented feedback on performance, learning and perception of ability volleyball waterfall skill in novice young boys [Master’s thesis]. [Tehran]: Payam Noor University; 2009. (In Persian).
27. Adams JA. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. J Mot Behav. 1971; 13:111-50.
28. Salmoni A, Schmidt RA, Walter CB. Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychol Bull. 1984; 95:355-86.
29. Nasri L, Bahram A, Hemayattalab R. The effects of reduction in feedback relative frequency and practice type on learning GMP in a serial timing task. Journal of Sport Management and Motor Behavior. 2014; 20:15-22. (In Persian).
30. Albuquerque MR, Ugrinowitsch H, Lage GM, Correa UC, Benda RN. Effects of knowledge of results frequency on the learning of generalized motor programs and parameters under conditions of constant practice. Percept Mot Skills. 2014; 119(1):1-13.
31. Badets A, Blandin Y. Feedback schedules for motor-skill learning: The similarities and differences between physical and observational practice. J Mot Behav. 2010; 42(4):257-69.
32. Lee TD, Carnahan H. Bandwidth knowledge of results and motor learning: More than just a relative frequency effect. Q J Exp Psychol. 1990; 42A:777–89.
33. Badets A, Blandin Y. Observational learning: Effects of bandwidth knowledge of results. J Mot Behav. 2005; 37:211–16.
34. Alipour A, Agah Haris M. Study of reliability and validity of Edinburgh’s handedness questionnaire in Iran. Psychological Science. 2007; 22:117-33. (In Persian).
35. Doosti M. Comparing effects of task’s difficulty and complexity on psychomotor performance, self-efficasy and mental attempt: Study of speed- accuracy trade-off [Master’s thesis]. [Tehran]: Alzahra University; 2015. (In Persian).
36. Hatami F. The effects of model’s skill level on performance and learning of simple serve in Volleyball [Master’s thesis]: [Tehran]: Shahid Beheshti University. 2004; (In Persian).
37. Sabbaghi A, Behpour N, Heyrani A. The effect of model’s skill level with emphasis on model and learner’ gender on the acquisition, retention and transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Sport Bioscience Researches. 2011; 5:39-49. (In Persian).
38. Shayan Nooshabadi A, Homaniyan D, Abedini Parizi H, Fazel Kalkhoran J. The interactional effect of modeling (skilled and self-model) and feedback on performance and learning of dart throwing skill. Journal of Development and Motor Learning. 2012; 10:123-42. (In Persian).
39. Ghavami A, Hosseini FS, Mohammadzadeh H. The effect of animated model observation and verbal instruction on motor learning of handstand balance skill. Int J Sport Stud. 2012; 22:84-8.
40. Abdoli B, Farsi A, Shoja O. The effects of self-controlled observational practice and model’s skill level on Badminton long serve. Motor Behavior. 2015; 20:35-48. (In Persian).
41. Anderson JR. Learning and memory: An integrated approach. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2000. p. 236.
42. Schmidt RA. A schema theory of dicrete motor skill learning. Psychol Rev. 1975; 82:225-60.
)