Acta Gymnica, 2018 (vol. 48), issue 1

Acta Gymnica 2018, 48(1):3-8 | DOI: 10.5507/ag.2018.001

The effect of feedback after good and poor trials on the continuous motor tasks learning

Reza Goudini1, Esmaeel Saemi2, Saeed Ashrafpoornavaee1, Behrouz Abdoli1
1 Faculty of Sport Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran; and
2 Faculty of Sport Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

Background: Although the useful effects of motivational feedback on the motor skills learning have been proven, a study focusing on the effects of feedback after good and poor trials in continuous motor tasks has not been conducted.

Objective: The purpose of the present study is to examine the effect of feedback after good versus poor trials on continuous motor tasks learning among novices.

Methods: Eighteen right-handed students (age 24.66 ± 1.35 years) were randomly divided in two groups (7 males and 2 females each) of good trial and poor trials. All participants completed 11 blocks of 6 trials for a total of 66 practice trials in line-tracking task. After each block of 6 trials, participants in the "feedback after good trials" group received feedback on their 3 best trials in that block, whereas those in the "feedback after poor trials" group received feedback on their 3 poorest trials in the block. The practice was conducted in a day and a retention test was administered after 48 hours.

Results: Our findings showed that feedback after good trials versus poor trials is significantly better for learning continuous motor tasks and performance (p < .05).

Conclusions: The findings of the present study highlight the motivational role of feedback in learning and performance of a continuous motor task.

Keywords: knowledge of results, good trials, poor trials, motivational feedback

Received: September 12, 2017; Accepted: January 22, 2018; Prepublished online: February 19, 2018; Published: March 31, 2018Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Goudini, R., Saemi, E., Ashrafpoornavaee, S., & Abdoli, B. (2018). The effect of feedback after good and poor trials on the continuous motor tasks learning. Acta Gymnica48(1), 3-8. doi: 10.5507/ag.2018.001.
Download citation

References

  1. Ahmadi, P., Sabzi, A. H., Heirani, A., & Hasanvand, B. (2011). The effect of feedback after good, poor, good-poor trials, and self-control conditions in acquisition and learning of force production task. Scientific Journal Facta Universitatis, 9, 35-43.
  2. Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2011). Feedback after good versus poor trials affects intrinsic motivation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 360-364. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2012). Feedback about more accurate versus less accurate trials: Differential effects on self-confidence and activation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83, 196-203. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Carter, M. J., & Patterson, J. T. (2012). Self-controlled knowledge of results: Age-related differences in motor learning, strategies, and error detection. Human Movement Science, 31, 1459-1472. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2002). Self-controlled feedback: Does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73, 408-415. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2005). Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner's performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76, 42-48. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2007). Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78, 40-47. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. 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, 405-410. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., Machado, C., & Rydberg, N. (2012). Self-controlled feedback enhances learning in adults with Down syndrome. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 16, 191-196. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., Wally, R., & Borges, T. (2009). Knowledge of results after good trials enhances learning in older adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80, 663-668. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  12. Coker, C. A. (2004). Motor learning and control for practitioners. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  13. Fairbrother, J. T., Laughlin, D. D., & Nguyen, T. V. (2012). Self-controlled feedback facilitates motor learning in both high and low activity individuals. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 323. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
  15. Fitzsimmons, P. A., Landers, D. M., Thomas, J. R., & van der Mars, H. (1991). Does self-efficacy predict performance in experienced weightlifters? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 424-431. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Guadagnoli, M. A., & Kohl, R. M. (2001). Knowledge of results for motor learning: Relationship between error estimation and knowledge of results frequency. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 217-224. Go to original source...
  17. Lai, Q., & Shea, C. H. (1999). Bandwidth knowledge of results enhances generalized motor program learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70, 79-83. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  18. Nieuwenhuis, S., Slagter, H. A., Geusau, V., Alting, N. J., Heslenfeld, D. J., & Holroyd, C. B. (2005). Knowing good from bad: Differential activation of human cortical areas by positive and negative outcomes. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 3161-3168. Go to original source...
  19. Saemi, E., Porter, J. M., Ghotbi-Varzaneh, A., Zarghami, M., & Maleki, F. (2012). Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13, 378-382. Go to original source...
  20. Saemi, E., Wulf, G., Varzaneh, A. G., & Zarghami, M. (2011). Feedback after good versus poor trials enhances motor learning in children. Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte, 25, 673-681. Go to original source...
  21. Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 355-386. Go to original source...
  22. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor control and learning (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  23. Schmidt, R. A., & Wrisberg, C. A. (2008). Motor learning and performance: A situation-based learning approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  24. Wulf, G. (2007). Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: Implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy, 93, 96-101. Go to original source...
  25. Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012). Altering mindset can enhance motor learning in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 27, 14-21. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.