Motor Behavior

The effect of self-control of task difficulty during the early and late practice on motor learning

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

masoud zahiri 1
Shahzad Tahmasebi Boroujeni 2
mehdi shahbazi 3
Esmaeel Saemi 4

1 Ph.D. Department of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences in Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences and Health, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor of Motor Behavior and Sport Psychology, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran.

3 Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran

4 Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of sport sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2022.11137.1999
Abstract
Combining self-controlled and imposed levels of task difficulty during training seems to be better than completely self-controlled conditions. This study aimed at determining whether self-control of task difficulty affects skill learning during the early and late practice stages. For this purpose, 48 novice of high school students with a mean age (17.5 ± 1.75) years were randomly divided into four groups including complete self-controlled, self-controlled at the early, self-controlled at the end and paired. In the acquisition phase, which includes 100 trails,the self-control group was informed that they could choose and practice any of the preset distances from the target (1/5, 3, 3/5, 4, 4/5, 5 m) before each trial during the acquisition phase. The task difficulty was either self-controlled or imposed to the participants in the two phases of the acquisition session. The accuracy score of basketball throwing were analyzed by mixed variance analysis with repeated measures in acquisition and retention and transfer tests. The results showed that self-control of task difficulty improves the compared to the paired group (P=0. 001). Secondly, the performance of self-control of task difficulty in the early practice group was better than self-control of task difficulty in the end practice group (P=0. 001). Third, accuracy in the self-control of task difficulty in the early practice group was significantly better than self-control difficulty group and the paired group (P=0. 001). In general, the benefits of self-control of task difficulty were justified using the challenge point framework, the information processing perspective and cognitive perspective.

Keywords

Performance-Based Adaptive training
Task Difficulty
Partial self controlld
Self-regulation
Motor learning
  1. Andrieux M, Boutin A, Thon B. Self-control of task difficulty during early practice promotes motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2016;48(1):57-65.
  2. Magill R, Anderson D. Motor learning and control: concepts and applications. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2011.
  3. Andrieux M, Danna J, Thon B. Self-control of task difficulty during training enhances motor learning of a complex coincidence-anticipation task. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2012;83(1):27-35.
  4. Jalalvand M, Bahram A, Daneshfar A, Arsham S. The effect of gradual self-control of task difficulty and feedback on learning golf putting. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2019;90(4):429-39.
  5. Higuchi T, Imanaka K, Hatayama T. Freezing degrees of freedom under stress: kinematic evidence of constrained movement strategies. Human Movement Science. 2002;21(5-6):831-46.
  6. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback: does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2002;73(4):408-15.
  7. Chen D, Hendrick J, Lidor R. Enhancing self-controlled learning environments: the use of self-regulated feedback information. Journal of Human Movement Studies. 2002;43(1):69.
  8. Wulf G, Shea CH. Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2002;9(2):185-211.
  9. Makki R, Abdoshahi M, Ghorbani S. Effects of self-controlled knowledge of performance on motor learning and self-efficacy: A kinematic study. Biomedical Human Kinetics. 2021;13(1):187-96.
  10. 1Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner's performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2005;76(1):42-8.
  11. Post PG, Fairbrother JT, Barros JA. Self-controlled amount of practice benefits learning of a motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2011;82(3):474-81.
  12. Hartman JM. Self-controlled use of a perceived physical assistance device during a balancing task. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2007;104(3):1005-16.
  13. Bordenave DH. Examining the learning effects of segmented model demonstrations on the motor & cognitive learning of the basketball jump shot. 2015.
  14. Pathania A, Leiker AM, Euler M, Miller MW, Lohse KR. Challenge, motivation, and effort: neural and behavioral correlates of self-control of difficulty during practice. Biological Psychology. 2019;141:52-63.
  15. Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Drews R. External focus and autonomy support: two important factors in motor learning have additive benefits. Human Movement Science. 2015;40:176-84.
  16. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Cognitive evaluation theory. In: Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Cham: Springer; 1985, pp. 43-85.
  17. Sanli EA, Patterson JT, Bray SR, Lee TD. Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the self-determination theory. Frontiers in Psychology. 2013;3:611.
  18. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2016;23(5):1382-414.
  19. Ste-Marie DM, Carter MJ, Law B, Vertes K, Smith V. Self-controlled learning benefits: exploring contributions of self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation via path analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2016;34(17):1650-6.
  20. Carter MJ, Ste-Marie DM. Not all choices are created equal: task-relevant choices enhance motor learning compared to task-irrelevant choices. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2017;24(6):1879-88.
  21. Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2004;36(2):212-24.
  22. Guadagnoli M, Aylsworth B. Efficiency in transfer from the anchored to standard golf putter. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching. 2013;8(4):755-68.
  23. Newell KM, Jordan K. Task constraints and movement organization: a common language. 2007.
  24. Leiker AM, Pathania A, Miller MW, Lohse KR. Exploring the neurophysiological effects of self-controlled practice in motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2019;7(1):13-34.
  25. Couvillion KF, Bass AD, Fairbrother JT. Increased cognitive load during acquisition of a continuous task eliminates the learning effects of self-controlled knowledge of results. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2020;38(1):94-9.
  26. Post PG, Aiken CA, Laughlin DD, Fairbrother JT. Self-control over combined video feedback and modeling facilitates motor learning. Human Movement Science. 2016;47:49-59.
  27. Leiker AM, Bruzi AT, Miller MW, Nelson M, Wegman R, Lohse KR. The effects of autonomous difficulty selection on engagement, motivation, and learning in a motion-controlled video game task. Human Movement Science. 2016;49:326-35.
  28. Lohse KR, Boyd LA, Hodges NJ. Engaging environments enhance motor skill learning in a computer gaming task. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2016;48(2):172-82.
  29. Janelle CM, Barba DA, Frehlich SG, Tennant LK, Cauraugh JH. Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1997;68(4):269-79.
  30. Aiken CA, Fairbrother JT, Post PG. The effects of self-controlled video feedback on the learning of the basketball set shot. Frontiers in Psychology. 2012;3:338.
  31. Edwards WH. Motor learning and control: from theory to practice: Cengage Learning; 2010.
  32. Post PG, Fairbrother JT, Barros JA, Kulpa J. Self-controlled practice within a fixed time period facilitates the learning of a basketball set shot. Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2014;2(1):9-15.
  33. Jaquess KJ, Lu Y, Iso-Ahola SE, Zhang J, Gentili RJ, Hatfield BD. Self-controlled practice to achieve neuro-cognitive engagement: Underlying brain processes to enhance cognitive-motor learning and performance. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2020;52(5):544-57.
  34. Chiviacowsky S, de Medeiros FL, Kaefer A, Wally R, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback in 10-year-old children: higher feedback frequencies enhance learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2008;79(1):122-7.
  35. Farrow D, Reid M. The effect of equipment scaling on the skill acquisition of beginning tennis players. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2010;28(7):723-32.
  36. Robins M, Davids K, Bartlett R, Wheat JS, editors. Effects of attentional strategies, task expertise and anxiety on coordination of a discrete multi-articular action. ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive; 2007.
  37. Maxwell J, Masters R, Kerr E, Weedon E. The implicit benefit of learning without errors. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A. 2001;54(4):1049-68.
  38. Lemos A, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R, Chiviacowsky S. Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2017;31:28-34.
  39. Reeve J, Tseng C-M. Cortisol reactivity to a teacher’s motivating style: the biology of being controlled versus supporting autonomy. Motivation and Emotion. 2011;35(1):63-74.
  40. Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Optimizing motivation and attention for motor performance and learning. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2017;16:38-42.
  41. Wulf G. Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy. 2007;93(2):96-101.
  42. Schmidt RA, Bjork RA. New conceptualizations of practice: common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science. 1992;3(4):207-18.
  43. Rotter JB. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. 1966;80(1):1.
  44. Hardy L, Nelson D. Self-regulation training in sport and work. Ergonomics. 1988;31(11):1573-83.
  45. Nezakat Alhosseini M, Bahram A, Farrokhi A. The effect of self-control feedback on the learning of generalized motor program and parameters during physical and observational practice. 2013.
  46. Abdoli B, Shojae O. The effect of self-controlled observational practice and model’s skill level on badminton long serve. Motor Behavior 2015;7(20):35-48.
  47. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, de Medeiros FL, Kaefer A, Tani G. Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2008;79(3):405-10.
  48. Pachman M, Sweller J, Kalyuga S. Levels of knowledge and deliberate practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2013;19(2):108.

 

 

Motor Behavior
Volume 15, Issue 53
Spring 2023
Pages 49-68

  • Receive Date 08 November 2021
  • Revise Date 21 January 2022
  • Accept Date 30 April 2022

Home

Reviewers

Submit Manuscript

Publication Ethics

news

Journal Metrics

Contact Us