Lenney (1977) suggests that three situational factors are likely to affect the self-confidence of females in achievement situations. These factors are the sex orientation of the task, social comparison, and the need for performance feedback. In this study, 40 children, 20 of each sex, were studied to determine if the self-confidence of young females in their motor performance abilities was affected by Lenney's third situational variable, performance feedback. Presumably, females need feedback about their performance if they are to attain and/or maintain adequate self-confidence levels. The experiment was designed to control the first two factors: sex orientation of the task and social comparison. Results indicated that when performing a task perceived to be “neutral” in sex orientation in a noncompetitive, noncomparative environment, the self-confidence of young girls did not differ from young boys. In the absence of Lenney's (1977) first two factors, girls did not seem to lack self-confidence nor did they seem to be more dependent on performance feedback than boys.
Charles B. Corbin, Michael J. Stewart and William O. Blair
Niilo Konttinen, Kaisu Mononen, Jukka Viitasalo and Toni Mets
This study examined the effectiveness of augmented auditory feedback on the performance and learning of a precision shooting task. Participants included Finnish conscripts (N = 30) who were randomly assigned to one of three groups: auditory feedback group (AFb), knowledge-of-results group (KR), and nontraining control group (Control). Data collection consisted of a pretest, a 4-week acquisition phase, a posttest, and two tests of retention. The effectiveness of the treatment was evaluated in terms of performance outcome, i.e., shooting result. Concurrent auditory feedback related to rife stability did not facilitate shooting performance in a practice situation. In the posttest and retention tests, the participants in the AFb group displayed more accurate shooting performance than those in the KR and Control groups. Findings suggest that a non-elite shooter’s performance can be improved with a 4-week auditory feedback treatment. Given that the learning advantage persisted for delayed retention tests, the observed improvement in skill acquisition was due to relatively permanent variables rather than to temporary effects.
Athanasios Mouratidis, Willy Lens and Maarten Vansteenkiste
We relied on self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2000) to investigate to what extent autonomy-supporting corrective feedback (i.e., feedback that coaches communicate to their athletes after poor performance or mistakes) is associated with athletes’ optimal motivation and well-being. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a cross-sectional study with 337 (67.1% males) Greek adolescent athletes (age M = 15.59, SD = 2.37) from various sports. Aligned with SDT, we found through path analysis that an autonomy-supporting versus controlling communication style was positively related to future intentions to persist and well-being and negatively related to ill-being. These relations were partially mediated by the perceived legitimacy of the corrective feedback (i.e., the degree of acceptance of corrective feedback), and, in turn, by intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, and external regulation for doing sports. Results indicate that autonomy-supporting feedback can be still motivating even in cases in which such feedback conveys messages of still too low competence.
David J. Sanderson
The purpose of this experiment was to assess the efficacy of using real-time generated computer feedback of a selected biomechanical variable, force, for modifying the pattern-of-force application of inexperienced cyclists while they cycled at a steady rate (60 rpm) and power output (approximately 112 watts). Positive results would imply that the technique of using biomechanical variables as augmented feedback could be applied in a learning study in such a way to train for the enhancement of performance of cyclists. This approach differs from the traditional one of using novices performing novel tasks. Even though the cyclists were inexperienced, they nonetheless knew how to cycle and thus modifications of the pattern of force application were made to an already existing complex skill.
Darian T. Cheng, Gerome A. Manson, Andrew Kennedy and Luc Tremblay
Cheng et al. (2008) showed that when goal-directed reaching movements are performed with a 2.5 s inter-trial interval (ITI) under a randomized visual feedback schedule, individuals use online visual information on trial n to perform efficient online corrections on trial n + 1 (i.e., “reminiscence” effect). These results persisted even when participants were given knowledge of the up-coming vision condition. In this study, the ITI was extended to 5 s in an attempt to negate any effects of the preceding trial. Results from this study revealed that trials with vision were always more accurate than trials performed without vision, suggesting that individuals relied significantly on online information. Furthermore, aiming precision improved when participants knew the vision condition before each trial. It is thus suggested that the reminiscence effects are not longer evident with a 5 s ITI, which in turn allows prior knowledge of visual feedback to influence the use of online vision.
Thomas Wandzilak, Ronald J. Bonnstetter and Lynn L. Mortensen
In order for university professors to become more effective at the practice of teaching, they must be provided with accurate, multidimensional feedback on what transpires in their own classes. The Teaching Feedback Model (TFM) is a process that combines the systematic observation of student and teacher behaviors with an analysis of student learning. Based on information provided by the coding of videotaped classroom episodes through a computer program and student learning data, a profile is constructed that informs the teacher whether continuity exists among what is supposed to occur (planning), what actually occurs (doing), and what the student has gained from the class (learning). The purpose of this paper is to present this model in detail and to demonstrate how it is currently being used in college-level physical education theory classes.
Bonnie L. Tjeerdsma
The purpose of this study was to directly compare teacher and student expectations for task difficulty and performance, perceptions of actual task difficulty, perceptions of student performance and effort, and perceptions of teacher feedback. Stimulated recall interviews following a 14-lesson volleyball unit were conducted with 8 sixth-grade students and their physical education teacher. The results revealed little congruency between student and teacher perspectives of task difficulty or perceptions of student performance and effort. The students and the teacher agreed the most on expected performance level and the least on perceptions of effort. Such differences in perspectives may be partially explained by the sources of information used by the teacher and students to form their expectations and perceptions. There was somewhat higher agreement between the teacher and students on the purpose of and affective reactions to skill-related feedback.
Kristine L. Chambers and Joan N. Vickers
The effects of a coaching intervention involving Bandwidth Feedback and Questioning (BF-Q) on competitive swim times (cTIME), practice swim times (pTIME), and technique (TECH) were determined for competitive youth swimmers. The pre-post-transfer design spanned one short-course (25m) swim season. It was concluded that coaching in which feedback was delayed and replaced with questions directed to the athletes contributed to improved technique and subsequent faster race times. Compared to the Control group, the BF-Q group displayed greater gains in TECH during the intervention period and greater improvement in cTIME during the transfer period. Results are presented in a context of cognitive psychology, motor learning, and questioning. Applications to coaching practice and coach training are also discussed.
Mathieu Simon Paul Meeûs, Sidónio Serpa and Bert De Cuyper
This study examined the effects of video feedback on the nonverbal behavior of handball coaches, and athletes’ and coaches’ anxieties and perceptions. One intervention group (49 participants) and one control group (63 participants) completed the Coaching Behavior Assessment System, Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, and Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 on two separate occasions, with 7 weeks of elapsed time between each administration. Coaches in the intervention condition received video feedback and a frequency table with a comparison of their personal answers and their team’s answers on the CB AS. Repeated-measures ANOVAs showed that over time, athletes in the intervention group reported significantly less anxiety and perceived their coaches significantly more positively compared with athletes in the nonintervention condition. Over time, coaches in the intervention group perceived themselves significantly more positively than coaches in the nonintervention condition. Compared with field athletes, goalkeepers were significantly more anxious and perceived their coaches less positively. It is concluded that an intervention using video feedback might have positive effects on anxiety and coach perception and that field athletes and goalkeepers possess different profiles.
Jed A. Diekfuss and Louisa D. Raisbeck
An external focus of attention, as opposed to an internal focus of attention, has been shown to increase performance and enhance learning. However, little research has examined whether these findings have been integrated into collegiate coaching and adopted by student-athlete performers. The purpose of this study was to examine the verbal instructions and instructional feedback provided by NCAA division 1 collegiate coaches during practice and how it influenced student-athletes’ focus of attention during competition. Thirty-one student-athletes completed a questionnaire that inquired about coaches’ verbal instructions and instructional feedback during practice and student-athletes’ focus of attention during competition. Fifty percent of participants reported that their coaches instructed them to focus their attention internally and only four participants reported that their coaches instructed them to focus externally. Our results also showed that coaches provided an equal amount of internal and external instructional feedback. During competition, however, the majority of participants reported statements that fell under the category of “winning and strategy.” These results suggest that the beneficial effects of an external focus of attention have not been integrated into NCAA division 1 collegiate coaching and the focus of attention adopted by student-athletes may be more complex than what is studied in laboratory research.