رفتار حرکتی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

هزینه های دریافت نشریه

راهنمای نویسندگان

فرم ها

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

توجه به دیدگاه‌های مختلف توانایی‌ها: تأثیر بازخورد عمومی و غیر-عمومی در یادگیری مهارت‌های حرکتی کودکان کم‌توان ذهنی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار پژوهشگاه تربیت بدنی

2 دانشجوی دکتری دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

هدف از اجرای این پژوهش، بررسی تأثیر بازخورد عمومی و غیر­عمومی بر اجرا و یادگیری حرکتی کودکان کم­توان ذهنی آموزش­پذیر بر­اساس دو دیدگاه متفاوت به توانایی­ها می­باشد. گروه نمونۀ پژوهش شامل 30 کودک کم­توان ذهنی آموزش­پذیر بود که به دو گروه بازخورد عمومی و غیر­عمومی تقسیم شدند و دو آزمایش را اجرا نمودند. در آزمایش اول از افراد خواسته شد تا توسط یک توپ فوتبال، به­ هدفی مشخص با پا شوت بزنند. در این تکلیف، تفاوتی بین دو گروه در دورۀ تمرینی مشاهده نگردید (P=0.918). زمانی که هر دو گروه بازخورد منفی دریافت نمودند، ارائۀ بازخورد عمومی منجر به نامطلوب­بودن اجرا نسبت به بازخورد غیر­عمومی گشت (P=0.003). در آزمون یادداری نیز گروه تمرین عمومی عملکرد ­­پایین­تر و معناداری را نسبت به گروه بازخورد غیر­عمومی داشتند (P=0.001). علاوه­براین، آزمایش دوم تأثیرات پایدار بیشتری را مورد بررسی قرار داد. نتایج آزمون­های یادداری که یک روز پس از تمرین تکلیف پرتابی انجام گردید نشان داد ­زمانی که بازخورد منفی ارائه گشت، آزمودنی­هایی که بازخورد غیر­عمومی را در زمان اجرای تکلیف دریافت کرده بودند، عملکرد بهتری نسبت به گروه بازخورد عمومی ­داشتند (P<0.05). این یافته­ها اهمیت جمله­بندی (نوع کلمات و شیوۀ بیان) بازخورد را اثبات نموده و نشان می­دهد­ بازخورد غیر­عمومی در اجرا و در یادگیری حرکتی­ مؤثر­تر از بازخورد عمومی می­باشد و مربیان هنگام ارائۀ بازخورد باید بر جنبه­هایی از توانایی­ها که قابل­یادگیری است تأکید داشته باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Consideration to different view of abilities: The effect of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning of mentally disabled children

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Kashi 1
  • zohreh shirvaniha 2

چکیده [English]

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of generic and non-generic feedback on motor performance and learning in mentally retarded children based on two approaches about abilities. 30 mentally retarded children were selected and divided into two generic and non-generic feedback groups and performed two experiments. In the first experiment, subjects were asked to kick a soccer ball into a specific target. During the acquisition period there was no difference between the two groups (P=0.918). However, after receiving negative feedback, providing generic feedback resulted in worse performance than non-generic feedback (P=0.003). In retention test, providing generic feedback during practice caused worse performance (P=0.001). In second experiment we examined more permanent consequences. Results of retention test, performed one day after practicing a throwing task, showed that participants who received non-generic feedback during practice outperformed the generic feedback group, after receiving a negative feedback statement (P<0.05). The findings demonstrated the importance of the wording of feedback (type and manner of expression) and showed that non-generic feedback is more effective in performance and learning process than generic feedback and in providing feedback coaches should emphasis on some aspects of ability that is learnable.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Ability
  • Positive and Negative Feedback
  • Generic and Non-Generic Feedback
  • Mentally Disabled Children
مراجع
1) Ashoory M, Jalil Abkenar S S. From mainstreaming to inclusive education:                    A t­ransition in the educational system. Exceptional Education. 2013; 4 ­(117)­: 49-60.
2) Hornby G. Inclusive education for children with special educational needs: A critique of policy and practice in New Zealand. Journal of International and Comparative Education. 2012; 1(1): 52-60.
3) Meegean S, MacPhail A. Irish physical educator’s attitude toward teaching students with special educational needs. European Physical Education Review. 2006; 12(1):     75–97.
4) Kudlacek M­, Jesina O­, Sterbova, D. The nature of work and roles of public school adapted physical education in the united states. European Journal of Adapted Physical Activity. 2008; 1(2): 45–55.
5) Schmidt R, Wrisberg C. Motor learning and performance with web study guide­-­A situation-based learning approach. 4th ed. Human Kinetics; Newzealand,2007.
6) Schmidt R A, Lee T D. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL. 5th ed. Human Kinetics; 2011. 
7)  Chiviacowsky S, Drews R. Effects of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning in children. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(2): e88989.
8) Ross M. Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. Psychol Rev. 1989; 96: 341–57.  
9) Nicholls J G. Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice and performance. Psychol Rev. 1984; 91: 328–46.
10) Dweck C S. Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press; 1999. 
11) Dweck C S. The development of ability conceptions. In­ A. Wigfield­­­& J. S. Eccles­­ (Eds.), Development of achievement ­motivation; A volume in the educational psychology series 2002. Pp. 57–88.  
12) Dweck C S, Leggett E L. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychol Rev. 1988; 95: 256–73.  
13) Drews R, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Children's motor skill learning is influenced by their conceptions of ability. JMLD. 2013; 1: 38–44. 
14) Jourden F J, Bandura A, Banfield J T. The impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory factors and motor skill acquisition. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1991; 8: 213–226. 
15) Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Conceptions of ability affect motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2009; 41: 461–7.
16) Cimpian A, Arce H M, Markman E M, Dweck C S. Subtle linguistic cues affect children's motivation. Psychol Sci. 2007; 18: 314–6.  
17) Byde R, McClenaghan B A. Effect of selected type of feedback on an anticipation timing task with moderately mentally retarded children. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly. 1984; 1: 141-6.  
18) Buckley S, Bird G, Sacks B. Evidence that we can change the profile from a study of inclusive education. Down Syndrome: Res Pract. 2006; 9: 51–3. 
19) Deborah J­, Nadel F. Education and children with Down syndrome: Neuroscience, development, and intervention. Mental retardation and developmental disabilities. Research Reviews. 2007; 13: 262 –71. 
20) Lyons S, Corneille D, Coker P, Ellis CH. A miracle in the outfield: The benefits of participation in organized baseball leagues for children with mental and physical disabilities. Therapeutic Recreation Journal. 2009; 3: 41-8.
21) Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: The importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Front Psychol. 2012; 3: ­458.  
22) Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2007; 78: 40–7.  
23) Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. Q J Exp Psychol. 2010; 63: 738–49. 
24) Badami R, VaezMousavi M, Wulf G, Namazizadeh M. Feedback after good trials enhances intrinsic motivation. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2011; 82: 360–4.
25) Saemi E, Porter J M, Varzaneh A G, Zarghami M, Maleki F. Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2012; 13: 378–82.
26) Saemi E, Wulf G, Varzaneh A G, Zarghami M. Feedback after good versus poor trials enhances learning in children. Rev Bras Educ Fís Esporte. 2011; 25: 671–9.
27) Ávila L T G, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2012; 13: 849–53. 
28) Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Medeiros F, Kaefer A, Tani G. Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year old children. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2008; 79: 405–10. 
29) Ames C, Archer J. Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. J Educ Psychol. 1988; 80: 260–7.
30) Dweck C S. Motivational processes affecting learning. Am Psychol. 1986; 41:   1040–8.  
31) Kamins M L, Dweck C S. Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Dev Psychol. 1999; 35: 835–47.
32) Carver C S, Scheier M F. Self-focusing effects of dispositional self-consciousness, mirror presence, and audience presence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1978; 36: 324–32.
33) Kashi A, Sarlak Z, Naghibi S. The effect of educational-training K­ashi package on information processing and mental and neurological complications of people with Down syndrome. Motor Behavior. 2014; 5­(14): ­47-67.
34) Sarlak Z, Kashi A, Shariatzadeh Jonydi M. Effect of selected exercise training program on cardiovascular function in adults with Down syndrome. Sport Physiology. 2013;11(17): 35-45.
35) Kashi A, Dadkhah A, Sheikh M. Rehabilitation in Down syndrome: By physical activity approach. Publication of University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences; 2014. 
36) Kashi A, Sheikh M, Dadkhah A, Hemayattalab R, Arabameri E. The effect of selected exercise training on reduce symptom of hypotonia and changing body composition in men with Down syndrome. Journal of Development and Motor Learning. 2016; 7(3): 269-294. 
37) Kashi A, Sheikh M, Dadkhah A, Hemayattalab R, Arabameri E. The effect of Kashi practices on the improvement of psycho-motor skills in people with Down Syndrome. IRJ. 2015; 13­(3)­: 13-21.
38) Sarlak Z, Dadkhah A, Kashi A, Sheikh M. The effect of a ­selected exercise ­training­ on reducing symptoms of dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease in people with Down syndrome. IRJ. 2013; 11 ­(17)­: 35-45.
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 8، شماره 23 - شماره پیاپی 23
بهار 1395
خرداد 1395
صفحه 15-32
فایل ها
سابقه مقاله
  • تاریخ دریافت: 19 خرداد 1394
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 08 بهمن 1394
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 12 بهمن 1394
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار