رفتار حرکتی

اثر تمرین با خطای بینایی ابینگهاوس (ادراک هدف بزرگ-ادراک هدف کوچک) بر عملکرد مهارت هدف‌گیری در افراد مستقل از زمینه و وابسته به زمینه

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی‌ارشد رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه اصفهان

2 استادیار رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه اصفهان

3 استاد رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه اصفهان

چکیده
هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی اثر تمرین با خطای بینایی ابینگهاوسبر یادگیری مهارت هدف‌گیریدر افراد مستقل از زمینه و وابسته به زمینهبود.دراین‌راستا، آزمونگروهی تصاویر پنهان‌شده بین 300دانش‌آموز پسربا میانگین سنی 08/1 ± 86/13 سال توزیع شد. براساسنمره‌هایبه‌دست‌آمده از آزمون، 60نفر به‌صورتتصادفی در چهار گروه 15نفری مستقل از زمینه با ادراک هدف بزرگ‌، وابسته به زمینه باادراک هدف کوچک‌، مستقل از زمینه با ادراک هدف کوچک‌ و وابسته به زمینه با ادراک هدف بزرگ‌، به‌صورت همگنتقسیم شدند. برای اطمینان از تفاوت‌نداشتن گروه­ها، پیش‌آزمون اجرا شد.شرکت­کنندگان تکلیف شوت تیلهرا به‌مدت سه جلسه و هر جلسه، سهدسته کوشش پنجاه‌تایی را با خطای مربوطبه گروه خود تمرین کردند. با فاصلة 24 ساعت بی­تمرینی، آزمون یادداری و 72 ساعت بعد، آزمون انتقال (همانند یادداری یک دسته کوشش چهل‌تایی) اجرا شدند. برای تحلیل داده­ها از آزمون آنوای دوطرفه و برای بررسی اثر متقابل از آزمون تعقیبی توکی استفاده شد. مقایسة نتایج نشان دادکه اثر اصلی سبک ‌شناختی در یادداری و اثرهای اصلی (سبک شناختی و خطای بینایی) و همچنین، اثر متقابل (خطای بینایی × سبک شناختی) در انتقال معنادار بودند (P < 0.05). یافته­ها تفاوتیمعنادار بین گروه وابسته به زمینه با خطای بینایی ادراک بزرگ‌و سه گروه دیگر نشان داد.به‌‌طورکلی، این پژوهش نشان دادکه برای افراد وابسته به زمینه تمرین با هدف بزرگ‌ درک‌شده،تأثیر منفیدارد وتمرین با هدف کوچک‌ درک‌شده یک مزیت است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

The Effect of Practice with Ebbinghaus' Illusion (Large target Perception – Small Target Perception) in Field Dependence and Field Independence Individuals on a Targeting Skill Performance

نویسندگان English

  • Mohsen Rajaei 1
  • Shila Safavi 2
  • Ahmad Reza Movahedi 3
1 M.Sc. of Motor Behavior, University of Isfahan
2 Assistant Professor of Motor Behavior, University of Isfahan
3 Professor Motor Behavior, University of Isfahan
چکیده English

The aim of present study Esfahan was to examine the effect of practice with Ebbinghaus' illusion on targeting skill performance in field dependence and field independence individuals. The Group Embedded Figure Test was distributed among 300 male students with the average age of 13.86±1.08. On the basis of the test results 60 people were divided into four groups (n=15) field independence on large target perception, field dependence on small target perception, field dependence on large target perception, field independence on small target perception groups. A pre-test was conducted to ensure that there were no differences between the groups at pre intervention time; the participants practiced marble shooting, (3×50 trials) in three sessions based on their groups. After 24 and 72 hours from the last practice session, retention and a transfer test was taken respectively. For analyzing data, two-way ANOVA and Tukey test were used. The results showed a significant difference between the main effect cognitive style on retention test and between the main effects cognitive style, visual error and the interaction effect (visual error×cognitive style) in the transfer test (P<0.05). Findings showed a significant difference between the field dependent group with the larger perceived target and the other groups (P<0.05). This study suggests that practicing with a larger perceived target for individuals who are field dependence, has a negative effect and, practicing with a smaller perceived target is an advantage for them.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Ebbinghaus' Illusion
  • Field Dependence and Field Independence
  • Cognitive Styles
  • Motor Learning
  1. Sternberg JR, Sternberg K. Cognitive Psychology. 6th ed. Astoralia: Dortmond; 2011. p. 84-132.
  2. Milner AD, Goodale MA. Two visual systems re-viewed. Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(3):774-85.
  3. Binkofski F, Buxbaum LJ. Two action systems in the human brain. Brain Lang. 2013;127(2):222-9.
  4. Aglioti S, DeSouza JF, Goodale MA. Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol. 1995;5(6):679-85.
  5. Servos P, Carnahan H, Fedwick J. The visuomotor system resists the horizontal-vertical illusion. J Mot Behav. 2000;32(4):400-4.
  6. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005 . p.130-46.
  7. Norman J. Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behav Brain Sci. 2002;25(1):73-96.
  8. Robinson JO. The psychology of visual illusion. Mineola, New York: dover publication; 2013. p.169-250.
  9. Cañal-Bruland R, van der Meer Y, Moerman J. Can visual illusions be used to facilitate sport skill learning? J Mot Behav. 2016; 48(5):1-5.
  10. Witt JK, Linkenauger SA, Proffitt DR. Get me out of this slump! Visual illusions improve sports performance. Psychol Sci. 2012;23(4):397-9.
  11. Witt JK, Linkenauger SA, Bakdash JZ, Proffitt DR. Putting to a bigger hole: Golf performance relates to perceived size. Psychonomic Bull Rev. 2008;15(3):581-5.
  12. Chauvel G, Wulf G, Maquestiaux F. Visual illusions can facilitate sport skill learning. Psychonomic Bull Rev. 2015;22(3):717-21.
  13. Witt JK, Proffitt DR. See the ball, hit the ball apparent ball size is correlated with batting average. Psychol Sci. 2005;16(12):937-8.
  14. Wesp R, Cichello P, Gracia EB, Davis K. Observing and engaging in purposeful actions with objects influences estimates of their size. Percept Psychophys. 2004;66(8):1261-7.
  15. Hanisch C, Konczak J, Dohle C. The effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping behaviour of children. Exp Brain Res. 2001;137(2):237-45.
  16. Phillips WA, Chapman KL, Berry PD. Size perception is less context-sensitive in males. Perception. 2004;33(1):79-86.
  17. Doherty MJ, Tsuji H, Phillips WA. The context sensitivity of visual size perception varies across cultures. Perception. 2008;37(9):1426-33.
  18. Baron-Cohen S, Richler J, Bisarya D, Gurunathan N, Wheelwright S. The systemizing quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high–functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Philos Trans R Soc London Ser B Biol Sci. 2003;358(1430):361-74
  19. Baron-Cohen S. The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends Cognit Sci. 2002;6(6):248-54.
  20. Davlin-Pater C. The effects of visual information and perceptual style on static and dynamic balance. Motor Control. 2010;14(3):362–70.
  21. Isableu B, Ohlmann T, Crémieux J, Amblard B. Differential approach to strategies of segmental stabilisation in postural control. Exp Brain Res. 2003;150(2):208–21.
  22. Onyekuru BU. Field dependence-field independence cognitive style, gender , career choice and academic achievement of secondary school students in Emohua local government area of Rivers State. J Educ Pract. 2015;6(10):76–86.
  23. Chen C-M, Tsai Y-N. Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Comput Educ. 2012;59(2):638-52.
  24. Chen C-M, Li Y-L. Personalised context-aware ubiquitous learning system for supporting effective English vocabulary learning. Interact Learn Environ. 2010;18(4):341-64.
  25. Bagust J, Docherty S, Haynes W, Telford R, Isableu B. Changes in rod and frame test scores recorded in schoolchildren during development: A longitudinal study. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):1–10.
  26. Pakideh A, Shetab Bousehri N, Heidarnezhad S. The effect of cognitive styles and environmental conditions on learning acquisition learning basics two male basketball students [Master's thesis]: [Ahwaz]. University of Shahid Chamran; 2012. (In Persian).
  27. Ghotbi VA, Zarghmi M, Saemi E, Maleki F. The effect of cognitive styles on accuracy: The role of working memory. Dev Mot Learn. 2013;10(8):61-78. (In Persian).
  28. Azizi H, Hoseini FS. Effect of external and internal focus of attention instructions in field dependence and independence on performance and learning of dart throwing. Mot Beha. 2015;7(22):131-84. (In Persian).
  29. Liu W, Chepyator-Thomson JR. Field dependence–independence and physical activity engagement among middle school students. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2009;14(2):125-36.
  30. Bahrami A, Ghotbi Varzane A, Saemi E. Accuracy assessment in open and closed environments: Cognitive style approach. Mot Behav. 2013;5(13):77-94 .(In Persian).
  31. Kadivar P, Abdullahpor M. Relation cognitive styles to development study. J Psychol 2005;3(8):30-44.
  32. Farhan V, Dabagh S, Mahmoodi A. Compare kinematic traits of free throw and basketball pairing with software kinovea. Paper prseneted at: National Conference on Applied Sciences of Sport and Health; 2015 October 8; Shahid Madani University of Azarbaijan, Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian).
  33. Yan JH. Cognitive styles affect choice response time and accuracy. Pers Indiv Differ. 2010;48(6):747-51.
  34. Ghffarzadeh Ahangar S, Shafizadeh P, Shetab Booshehri N, Ghotbi Varzane A. Comparison of simple and selective visual and auditory response time in cognitive and field dependent fields. J Sport manegement action Behav. 2013;9(17):131-42. (In Persian).
  35. Prochaska JJ, Sallis JF, Griffith B, Douglas J. Physical activity levels of Barbadian youth and comparison to a US sample. Int J Behav Med. 2002;9(4):360-72.
  36. Wood G, Vine SJ, Wilson MR. The impact of visual illusions on perception, action planning, and motor performance. Attention Percept Psychophys. 2013;75(5):830-4.
  37. Bahmani M, Wulf G, Ghadiri F, Karimi S, Lewthwaite R. Enhancing performance expectancies through visual illusions facilitates motor learning in children. Hum Mov Sci. 2017;55:1-7.
  38. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bull Rev. 2016;23(5):1382-414.
  39. Trempe M, Sabourin M, Proteau L. Success modulates consolidation of a visuomotor adaptation task. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit. 2012;38(1):52-60.
  40. Rahimzadeghan Z, SHabani B, Motazavi S. Dependency field managers and change management in higher education Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. J Fundam Ment Heal. 2009;11(43):239–47.
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 12، شماره 39
بهار 1399
فروردین 1399
صفحه 33-50

  • تاریخ دریافت 22 مرداد 1396
  • تاریخ بازنگری 23 دی 1396
  • تاریخ پذیرش 29 بهمن 1396

صفحه اصلی

داوران

ارسال مقاله

اصول اخلاقی

اخبار و اعلانات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تماس با ما