Volume 11, Issue 21 (7-2021)                   JRSM 2021, 11(21): 44-55 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

rahimizadeh M, shahbazi M. The Effect of Generic and Non-generic Feedback on Basketball Free Throw Learning in Children. JRSM 2021; 11 (21) :44-55
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2394-en.html
1- university of tehran , rahimizadeh69@ut.ac.ir
2- university of tehran
Abstract:   (3724 Views)

Non-generic feedback refers to a specific event and that task performance is the reason to the acquisition of skills and implies that performance is malleable, while generic feedback implies that task performance reflects an inherent ability. The Goal of this study was to determine the generic and non-generic feedback effects on children’s motor learning basketball free throw. This research was semi-experimental. For this purpose, sixty children of Tehran (30 girls and 30 boys) aged 9-13 years participated in the study and were randomly divided into four groups of 15 individuals. Subjects performed six basketballs free throw in the acquisition (Two blocks of three trials). Which after the third throw, according to the group of subjects received a positive feedback (generic or non-generic) and also after the Sixth throw, negative feedback. After half an hour was immediate retention in the same way. Data were analyzed by using two-way ANOVA and repeated measures. Results showed that non-generic feedback was significantly more effective than generic feedback and shows more improvement in Performance. The present results demonstrate the importance of the wording of feedback, although these terms might not have an immediate effect on performance but by enhance motivation, poor performance is purportedly.

Full-Text [PDF 1132 kb]   (798 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: motor behavior
Received: 2016/11/2 | Accepted: 2020/10/24 | ePublished ahead of print: 2020/10/24 | Published: 2021/07/1

1. Schmidt R, Lee T. Motor control and learning 4th ed, 207-242. Human Kinetics Publisher; 2005.
2. Magill RA. Motor learning and control. Concepts and applications. 2004;7.
3. Smith R, Lee T. Motor control and learning: a behavioural emphasis. Champaign: Human Kinetics. 1998.
4. Schimidt RA. Motor Learning and Performance from Principles to Practice. Illionis: Human Kineticks Publishers Inc. 1991.
5. Adams JA. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of motor behavior. 1971;3(2):111-50.. [DOI:10.1080/00222895.1971.10734898]
6. Ilies R, Judge TA. Goal regulation across time: the effects of feedback and affect. Journal of applied psychology. 2005;90(3):453. [DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.453]
7. Allen J, Howe BL. Player ability, coach feedback, and female adolescent athletes' perceived competence and satisfaction. Journal of sport and exercise psychology. 1998;20(3):280-99. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.20.3.280]
8. Mouratidis A, Vansteenkiste M, Lens W, Sideridis G. The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: Evidence for a motivational model. Journal of sport & exercise psychology. 2008;30(2):240. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.30.2.240]
9. Clark SE, Ste-Marie DM. The impact of self-as-a-model interventions on children's self-regulation of learning and swimming performance. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2007;25(5):577-86. [DOI:10.1080/02640410600947090]
10. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback: Does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it? Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2002;73(4):408-15. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2002.10609040]
11. Patterson JT, Carter M. Learner regulated knowledge of results during the acquisition of multiple timing goals. Human movement science. 2010;29(2):214-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2009.12.003]
12. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2007;78(2):40-7. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2007.10599402]
13. Saemi E, Wulf G, Varzaneh AG, Zarghami M. Feedback after good versus poor trials enhances motor learning in children. Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte. 2011;25(4):673-81. [DOI:10.1590/S1807-55092011000400011]
14. Ávila LT, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2012;13(6):849-53. [DOI:10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.07.001]
15. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Frontiers in psychology. 2012;3:458. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00458]
16. Chiviacowsky S, Drews R. Effects of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning in children. PloS one. 2014;9(2):e88989. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0088989]
17. Ross M. Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. Psychological review. 1989;96(2):341. [DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.96.2.341]
18. Dweck CS. Motivational processes affecting learning. American psychologist. 1986;41(10):1040. [DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1040]
19. Dweck CS, Leggett EL. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological review. 1988;95(2):256. [DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256]
20. Gelman SA, Heyman GD. Carrot-eaters and creature-believers: The effects of lexicalization on children's inferences about social categories. Psychological Science. 1999;10(6):489-93. [DOI:10.1111/1467-9280.00194]
21. Cimpian A, Arce H-MC, Markman EM, Dweck CS. Subtle linguistic cues affect children's motivation. Psychological Science. 2007;18(4):314-6. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01896.x]
22. Drews R, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Children's motor skill learning is influenced by their conceptions of ability. JMLD. 2013;1:38-44. [DOI:10.1123/jmld.1.2.38]
23. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Conceptions of ability affect motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2009;41(5):461-7. [DOI:10.3200/35-08-083]
24. Dweck CS. The development of ability conceptions. 2002. [DOI:10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50005-X]
25. Wulf G. Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy. 2007;93(2):96-101. [DOI:10.1016/j.physio.2006.08.005]
26. Badami R, VaezMousavi M, Wulf G, Namazizadeh M. Feedback after good versus poor trials affects intrinsic motivation. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2011;82(2):360-4. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2011.10599765]
27. Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2010;63(4):738-49. [DOI:10.1080/17470210903111839]
28. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, de Medeiros FL, Kaefer A, Tani G. Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2008;79(3):405-10. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2008.10599505]
29. Hong Y-y, Chiu C-y, Dweck CS, Lin DM-S, Wan W. Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social psychology. 1999;77(3):588. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.588]
30. Nicholls JG. Causal attributions and other achievement-related cognitions: Effects of task outcome, attainment value, and sex. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1975;31(3):379. [DOI:10.1037/h0076505]
31. Jourden FJ, Bandura A, Banfield JT. The impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory factors and motor skill acquisition. Journal of sport and exercise psychology. 1991;13(3):213-26. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.13.3.213]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Research in Sport Management and Motor Behavior

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb