Motor Behavior

The effect of autonomy support on learning overhand throw in elementary school students

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Adele Ahmadinejad 1
Ahdiyeh Yadolahzadeh 2
saleh rafiee 3

1 MSc of Motor Behavior, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran

3 faculty member of SSRC

https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2024.16163.2134
Abstract
This study was conducted to explore the effect of autonomy support on learning overhand throw in elementary school students. This research was semi-experimental with a pre-posttest design with a control group. Fifty-four girls from an elementary school in Astana Ashrafieh city were selected and asked to learn the task of throwing with the non-dominant hand towards a target consisting of several circles on the wall. After the pre-test, these children were placed in one of 3 groups: task-relevant choices, task-irrelevant choices, and yoked group. Subsequently, the participants were asked to participate in the acquisition phase (5 blocks of 10 trials) and one day after that they participated in the retention and transfer tests. Pre-test, retention and transfer scores were analyzed in separate one-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs). In the practice phase, scores were analyzed in a 3 (groups) x 5 (block) analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures on the last factor. The analysis showed that task-relevant (p= 0/019) and task-irrelevant (p= 0/002) choice groups were able to perform better in the retention test as compared to the yoked group. Nevertheless, in the transfer test, only the task-relevant choice group (p= 0/017) was able to perform better as compared to the yoked group. It seems that, at least for children, task-relevant choices can have both information- and motivation-based effectiveness.

Keywords

motor learning
autonomy support
task-related choices
task-unrelated choices

Subjects

  1. Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(5), 1382-1414.
  2. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182.
  3. Sanli, E. A., Patterson, J. T., Bray, S. R., & Lee, T. D. (2013). Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the self-determination theory. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 611.
  4. Chiviacowsky, S. (2022). Autonomy Support in Motor Performance and Learning. In The Psychology of Closed Self-Paced Motor Tasks in Sports (pp. 78-92): Routledge.
  5. Post, P. G., Fairbrother, J. T., & Barros, J. A. (2011). Self-controlled amount of practice benefits learning of a motor skill. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 82(3), 474-481.‏
  6. Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., de Medeiros, F. L., Kaefer, A., & Tani, G. (2008). Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 79(3), 405-410.‏
  7. Wulf, G., Raupach, M., & Pfeiffer, F. (2005). Self-controlled observational practice enhances learning. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 76(1), 107-111.‏
  8. Lewthwaite, R., Chiviacowsky, S., Drews, R., & Wulf, G. (2015). Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 22(5), 1383-1388.
  9. Wulf, G., Iwatsuki, T., Machin, B., Kellogg, J., Copeland, C., & Lewthwaite, R. (2018). Lassoing skill through learner choice. Journal of Motor Behavior, 50(3), 285-292.
  10. Carter, M. J., & Ste-Marie, D. M. (2017). Not all choices are created equal: Task-relevant choices enhance motor learning compared to task-irrelevant choices. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24, 1879-1888.‏
  11. McKay, B., & Ste-Marie, D. M. (2020). Autonomy support and reduced feedback frequency have trivial effects on learning and performance of a golf putting task. Human Movement Science, 71, 102612.‏
  12. McKay, B., Bacelar, M. F., Parma, J. O., Miller, M. W., & Carter, M. J. (2023). The combination of reporting bias and underpowered study designs has substantially exaggerated the motor learning benefits of self-controlled practice and enhanced expectancies: A meta-analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-21.‏
  13. Chiviacowsky, S., G. Wulf, and L. Ávila (2013). An external focus of attention enhances motor learning in children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 57(7)و 627-634.
  14. Lesani, A. and M. Shahbazi (2017). The effect of Self-Controlled Practice on Basketball Free Throw Performance and Self-Efficacy of Female Students. Sport Psychology Studies. 6(21), 61-76. (In Persian)
  15. Razaghi, S., E. Saemi, and R. Abedanzadeh (2019).The Effect of Self-Control FeedBack on Motor Learning, Balance Confidence and Elderly’s Self-Efficacy in a Balancing Task. Sport Psychology Studies. 8(28), 207-220. (In Persian)
  16. Lemos, A., Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2017). Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 31, 28-34.‏
  17. Chiviacowsky, S., Martins, L., & Cardozo, P. (2021). Autonomy support facilitates team motor learning. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 52, 159-171.‏
  18. McKay, B., & Ste-Marie, D. M. (2022). Autonomy support via instructionally irrelevant choice not beneficial for motor performance or learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 93(1), 64-76.‏
  19. Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, F. (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self‐regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57-68.‏
  20. Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A., & Beyers, W. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: Associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and instruction, 22(6), 431-439.

 

 

Motor Behavior
Volume 15, Issue 54
Autumn 2024
Pages 119-132

  • Receive Date 06 January 2024
  • Revise Date 02 March 2024
  • Accept Date 03 March 2024

Home

Reviewers

Submit Manuscript

Publication Ethics

news

Journal Metrics

Contact Us