Study on correlation between motor and memory learning
Keywords:
Attention, Memory, Motor learningAbstract
The Knowledge of the Result for motor learning, relationship between subjective estimation of the error and relative frequency of external feedback. Research on the learning of a motor task, although generally conducted on healthy individuals, can offer useful indications about the best strategies to be adopted in the rehabilitation of subjects with CNS lesions. In fact, rehabilitation can be considered as a learning process in pathological conditions. There are numerous experimental evidences that, a lower relative frequency (FR) with which it is provided to the one who learns the knowledge of the result (CR) about the outcome of the response, and the request of the formulation of a subjective estimate before the CR (SS) both positively affect the fixation of the motor task. Recently, however, the possibility of an interaction between these two variables has been suggested, in the sense that the subject, when he must formulate a subjective estimate of the error, would benefit from a greater, and not a lesser, FR. To verify this, 60 healthy young subjects (mean age 24.1 ± 3.2) performed a simple task of producing a concentric work target with flexed elbow muscles during isokinetic contraction at a rate of 30 degrees / second. During the practice trials, subjects a) were required, or were not required, to estimate the error made in the newly concluded trial, and b) CR was provided after each trial (100% FR) or after one in every five trials (20 % FR). To further stress the difference between the subjects who were or should not formulate an SS, the latter was asked, immediately after the conclusion of the trial, to perform a simple mental calculation. All subjects performed 15 sets of 10 repetitions of the task during a single practice session. A retention test (1 set of 10 repetitions without CR or SS) was performed the following day. The comparison between the groups in the retention test was performed with the analysis of the variance, before and after adjustment for the initial conditions. The results showed that, after adjusting for the initial conditions, the group of subjects who received CR with 100% FR and who had to formulate the SS during the practice period, performed the retention test in a significantly better way.
Downloads
References
Adams, J. A. (1971). A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of motor behavior, 3(2), 111-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1971.10734898
Adams, J. A. (1987). Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychological bulletin, 101(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.101.1.41
Carnahan, H., Vandervoort, A. A., & Swanson, L. R. (1996). The influence of summary knowledge of results and aging on motor learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67(3), 280-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1996.10607955
Gable, C. D., Shea, C. H., & Wright, D. L. (1991). Summary knowledge of results. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 62(3), 285-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1991.10608725
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(2), 217-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222890109603152
Guadagnoli, M. A., Dornier, L. A., & Tandy, R. D. (1996). Optimal length for summary knowledge of results: the influence of task-related experience and complexity. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67(2), 239-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1996.10607950
Kohl, R. M., & Shea, C. H. (1992). Pew (1966) revisited: Acquisition of hierarchical control as a function of observational practice. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24(3), 247-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1992.9941620
Lai, Q., & Shea, C. H. (1999). Bandwidth knowledge of results enhances generalized motor program learning. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 70(1), 79-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1999.10607734
Liu, J., & Wrisberg, C. A. (1997). The effect of knowledge of results delay and the subjective estimation of movement form on the acquisition and retention of a motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68(2), 145-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1997.10607990
Nicholson, D. E., & Schmidt, R. A. (1991, September). Scheduling information feedback to enhance training effectiveness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 35, No. 19, pp. 1400-1402). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129103501913
Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. Psychological bulletin, 95(3), 355. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.95.3.355
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological review, 82(4), 225. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076770
Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Motor learning & performance: From principles to practice. Human Kinetics Books.
Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological science, 3(4), 207-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00029.x
Schmidt, R. A., Lange, C., & Young, D. E. (1990). Optimizing summary knowledge of results for skill learning. Human Movement Science, 9(3-5), 325-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9457(90)90007-z
Shea, C. H., Shebilske, W., & Worchel, S. (1993). Motor learning and control. Prentice Hall.
Suddon, F. H., & Lavery, J. J. (1962). The effect of amount of training on retention of a simple motor skill with 0-and 5-trial delays of knowledge of results. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 16(4), 312. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0083258
Swinnen, S. P. (1996). for Motor Skill Learning: A Review. Advances in motor learning and control, 37.
Swinnen, S. P., Schmidt, R. A., Nicholson, D. E., & Shapiro, D. C. (1990). Information feedback for skill acquisition: Instantaneous knowledge of results degrades learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(4), 706. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.16.4.706
Vander Linden, D. W., Cauraugh, J. H., & Greene, T. A. (1993). The effect of frequency of kinetic feedback on learning an isometric force production task in nondisabled subjects. Physical Therapy, 73(2), 79-87. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/73.2.79
Weeks, D. L., & Kordus, R. N. (1998). Relative frequency of knowledge of performance and motor skill learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69(3), 224-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1998.10607689
Winstein, C. J. (1987). Motor learning considerations in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke rehabilitation: the recovery of motor control. Chicago: Year Book Medical, 109-34.
Winstein, C. J. (1991). Knowledge of results and motor learning—implications for physical therapy. Physical therapy, 71(2), 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/71.2.140
Winstein, C. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(4), 677. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.16.4.677
Wishart, L. R., & Lee, T. D. (1997). Effects of aging and reduced relative frequency of knowledge of results on learning a motor skill. Perceptual and motor skills, 84(3), 1107-1122. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1997.84.3.1107
Yao, W. X., Fischman, M. G., & Wang, Y. T. (1994). Motor skill acquisition and retention as a function of average feedback, summary feedback, and performance variability. Journal of motor behavior, 26(3), 273-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1994.9941683
Downloads
Statistics
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Journal of Human Sport and Exercise
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Each author warrants that his or her submission to the Work is original and that he or she has full power to enter into this agreement. Neither this Work nor a similar work has been published elsewhere in any language nor shall be submitted for publication elsewhere while under consideration by JHSE. Each author also accepts that the JHSE will not be held legally responsible for any claims of compensation.
Authors wishing to include figures or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
Please include at the end of the acknowledgements a declaration that the experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the abovementioned requirements. The author(s) will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
This title is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
You are free to share, copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
Transfer of Copyright
In consideration of JHSE’s publication of the Work, the authors hereby transfer, assign, and otherwise convey all copyright ownership worldwide, in all languages, and in all forms of media now or hereafter known, including electronic media such as CD-ROM, Internet, and Intranet, to JHSE. If JHSE should decide for any reason not to publish an author’s submission to the Work, JHSE shall give prompt notice of its decision to the corresponding author, this agreement shall terminate, and neither the author nor JHSE shall be under any further liability or obligation.
Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article, except as disclosed on a separate attachment. All funding sources supporting the Work and all institutional or corporate affiliations of the authors are acknowledged in a footnote in the Work.
Each author certifies that his or her institution has approved the protocol for any investigation involving humans or animals and that all experimentation was conducted in conformity with ethical and humane principles of research.
Competing Interests
Biomedical journals typically require authors and reviewers to declare if they have any competing interests with regard to their research.
JHSE require authors to agree to Copyright Notice as part of the submission process.
