Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 20 items for :

  • "knowledge of performance" x
  • All content x
Clear All
Restricted access

Marcelo Eduardo de Souza Nunes, Umberto Cesar Correa, Marina Gusman Thomazi Xavier de Souza, Luciano Basso, Daniel Boari Coelho, and Suely Santos

results (KRs) or knowledge of performance (KP). Seminal studies by Janelle, Kim, and Singer ( 1995 ) and Janelle, Barba, Frehlich, Tennant, and Cauraugh ( 1997 ) provided evidence for the superiority of learning under a self-controlled schedule, compared with a situation of externally controlled feedback

Restricted access

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.

Restricted access

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.

Restricted access

Kirrie J. Ballard, Heather D. Smith, Divija Paramatmuni, Patricia McCabe, Deborah G. Theodoros, and Bruce E. Murdoch

Knowledge of Performance (KP) feedback, such as biofeedback or kinematic feedback, is used to provide information on the nature and quality of movement responses for the purpose of guiding active learning or rehabilitation of motor skills. It has been proposed that KP feedback may interfere with long-term learning when provided throughout training. Here, twelve healthy English-speaking adults were trained to produce a trilled Russian [r] in words with KP kinematic feedback using electropalatography (EPG) and without KP (noKP). Five one-hour training sessions were provided over one week with testing pretraining and one day and one week posttraining. No group differences were found at pretraining or one day post training for production accuracy. A group by time interaction supported the hypothesis that providing kinematic feedback continually during skill acquisition interferes with retention.

Restricted access

William S. Little and Penny McCullagh

The present study examined the potential interaction effects of using different instructional strategies with intrinsically and extrinsically motivated youths. Subjects whose motivation to participate in sports was either one of intrinsic mastery or extrinsic mastery were randomly placed in one of two instructional groups: knowledge of results (KR) or knowledge of performance (KP). All four groups received a videotaped, modeled demonstration of the skill to be learned, the tennis forehand. Subjects participated in a 3-day acquisition period and a 1-day testing phase, during which both form and outcome scores were recorded. Analysis of acquisition outcome scores yielded no significant differences between motivational orientation or instructional groups. Multivariate analysis of the test phase outcome and form scores revealed significant group differences, as well as significant group-by-motivation and group-by-blocks interactions. Subsequent discriminant analyses indicated that form scores were more affected than outcome scores by the instructional and motivational group manipulations. The interaction results of the test phase supported the prediction of different performance effects as a function of motivational orientation and instructional strategy.

Restricted access

B. Ann Boyce

This field-based study investigated the effect of an instructional strategy with two schedules of augmented knowledge-of-performance (KP) feedback on skill acquisition of a selected shooting task. Students enrolled in university rifle classes (N=135) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (a) instructional strategy (IS) with KP feedback after every trial, (b) IS with summary KP feedback, and (c) no IS with no KP feedback. Data collection consisted of (a) a pretest phase (one set of five trials) and (b) an acquisition phase (four sets of five trials). Instructional integrity was maintained during data collection so that students were treated as class participants. The findings indicated that (a) the presence of the instructional strategy in conjunction with the two feedback schedules appeared to positively effect the overall shooting performance as compared to no strategy/no KP, (b) the effects of the two KP schedules did not statistically differ from one another, and (c) the significant effect for trials indicated that as shooting practice progressed subjects in all three conditions appeared to improve.

Restricted access

-Controlled Knowledge of Performance Marcelo Eduardo de Souza Nunes * Umberto Cesar Correa * Marina Gusman Thomazi Xavier de Souza * Luciano Basso * Daniel Boari Coelho * Suely Santos * 27 3 300 308 10.1123/japa.2018-0053 japa.2018-0053 Associations Between Gait-Related Falls and Gait Adaptations When

Restricted access

Julián Gandía, Xavier García-Massó, Adrián Marco-Ahulló, and Isaac Estevan

(PE) teachers who provide verbal augmented feedback to influence the students’ motor skill learning. Augmented feedback most frequently transmitted takes on one of two forms: knowledge of results (KR) and knowledge of performance or process (KP) ( Fujii et al., 2016 ). On the one hand, KR is known

Restricted access

Cassio M. Meira Jr and Jeffrey T. Fairbrother

provided by an external source (teacher or researcher) and may focus on the outcome (knowledge of results – split times from a wristwatch) or the technique (knowledge of performance—a dance teacher nudges a pupil’s arm to indicate its right position) ( Magill & Anderson, 2015 ; Schmidt & Lee, 2011

Restricted access

Alexander T. Latinjak, Marc Masó, and Nikos Comoutos

( Ziegler, 1987 ), enhancing concentration ( Hatzigeorgiadis, Zourbanos, & Theodorakis, 2007 ) and providing knowledge of performance feedback ( Cutton & Landin, 2007 ). The innovative contribution of this study was the description of differences in the content of instructional self-talk depending on the