Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 438 items for :

  • "interference" x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All
Restricted access

Saša Krstulović, Andrea De Giorgio, Óscar DelCastillo Andrés, Emerson Franchini, and Goran Kuvačić

considerable decrease in the risk of fall-related injuries. In the motor learning field, numerous factors can influence the efficacy of skill practice. One of the learning phenomena that occurs during multiple skills practice is the contextual interference effect (CI). The interference is created when motor

Restricted access

Takehide Kimura and Ryouta Matsuura

When an individual performs two tasks simultaneously, performance in either one or both tasks often decreases. This decrement in performance is defined as dual-task interference ( Ebersbach, Dimitrijevic, & Poewe, 1995 ). In our daily life, we perform various combinations of dual tasks and

Restricted access

Guilherme M. Lage, Larissa O. Faria, Natália F.A. Ambrósio, Athos M.P. Borges, and Tércio Apolinário-Souza

In the motor learning area, the term “contextual interference effect” is defined as the degree of functional interference found on learning when multiple tasks are practiced together ( Magill & Hall, 1990 ). Contextual interference effect is not a directly quantifiable construct. The level of

Restricted access

Brenda Carolina Nájera Chávez, Stefan Mark Rueckriegel, Roland Burghardt, and Pablo Hernáiz Driever

; Rueckriegel et al., 2008 ). In this study, we analyzed the development of laterality by comparing performance of tasks of varying complexity of the dominant with the nondominant hand in healthy subjects between the age of 6 and 18 years. Next, we investigated the impact of bimanual interference on the

Restricted access

Michael VanNostrand, Brittany Belanger, Gabriel Purin, Susan L. Kasser, and Michael Cannizzaro

from the attentional demands of walking are also compounded by existing cognitive deficits experienced by persons with MS ( Benedict & Zivadinov, 2011 ). Evidence suggests that dual tasking, reflective of cognitive-motor interference (CMI), is especially difficult for people with MS and further

Restricted access

Sarah Taylor, Bradley Fawver, Joseph L. Thomas, A. Mark Williams, and Keith R. Lohse

, termed contextual interference (CI), explains superior learning as a function of the level of interference that occurs during practice. Random practice schedules create interference because one must switch between different tasks (e.g., ACB–BCA–CAB) during practice, whereas blocked practice leads to

Restricted access

Julien Robineau, Mathieu Lacome, Julien Piscione, Xavier Bigard, and Nicolas Babault


To assess the impact of 2 high-intensity interval-training (HIT) programs (short interval vs sprint interval training) on muscle strength and aerobic performances in a concurrent training program in amateur rugby sevens players.


Thirty-six amateur rugby sevens players were randomly assigned to strength and short interval training (INT), strength and sprint interval training (SIT), or a strength-only training group (CON) during an 8-wk period. Maximal strength and power tests, aerobic measurements (peak oxygen uptake [VO2peak] and maximal aerobic velocity), and a specific repeated-sprint ability (RSA) test were conducted before and immediately after the overall training period.


From magnitude-based inference and effect size (ES ± 90% confidence limit) analyses, the current study revealed substantial gains in maximal strength and jump-height performance in all groups. The difference in change of slow concentric torque production was greater in CON than in SIT (0.65 ± 0.72, moderate). VO2peak and, consequently, mean performance in the RSA test were improved in the SIT group only (0.64 ± 0.29, moderate; –0.54 ± 0.35, moderate).


The study did not emphasize interference on strength development after INT but showed a slight impairment of slow concentric torque production gains after SIT. Compared with INT, SIT would appear to be more effective to develop VO2peak and RSA but could induce lower muscle-strength gains, especially at low velocity.

Restricted access

Nicholas Stanger, Ryan Chettle, Jessica Whittle, and Jamie Poolton

). However, research has neglected to examine how emotions experienced before and during performance are linked with specific internal thought disruptions (i.e., cognitive interference) or to test for amenable moderators of such relationships. Such research would guide sport practitioners (e.g., coaches

Restricted access

Markus Janczyk and Wilfried Kunde

According to the Perception-Action-Model (PAM), the human visual cortex consists of the ventral vision-for-perception and the dorsal vision-for-action streams. Performance decrements with increasing variation of nominally task-irrelevant stimulus features (Garner-Interference) was suggested as an empirical tool for identifying contributions of these streams: vision-for-perception, but not visionfor-action, should suffer from Garner-Interference, but inconsistencies in this argument were revealed by several studies. We here used a new manipulation to induce Garner-Interference in a dorsal task: The stimulus objects did not differ in their lengths but in the side to which they were weighted. In Experiment 1, Garner-Interference was found in a ventral perceptual judgment task. Notably, we did also find Garner-Interference in skilled right-handed grasping in Experiment 2. These findings suggest that the presence or absence of Garner-Interference does not consistently index the contribution of different processing streams for perception and action, but the coprocessing of nominally task-irrelevant stimulus features in general, be it for perception of action.

Restricted access

Dana Maslovat, Romeo Chua, Timothy D. Lee, and Ian M. Franks

This experiment examined contextual interference in producing a bimanual coordination pattern of 90° relative phase. Acquisition, retention, and transfer performance were compared in a single-task control group and groups that performed 2 tasks in either a blocked or random presentation. Surprisingly, acquisition data revealed that both the random and control groups outperformed the blocked group. Retention data showed a typical CI effect for performance variability, with the random group outperforming the blocked group. Neither the random nor blocked groups outperformed the control group, suggesting interference of a second task may be as beneficial to learning as extra practice on the initial task. No group effects were found during transfer performance. Results suggest that random practice is beneficial for learning only one task.