Volume 6, Issue 12 (11-2016)
JRSM 2016, 6(12): 45-56 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
abdoli B, ahmadi N, ghazi A. Effects of vision and amount of practice on accuracy and kinematic of dart throwing “Study of the specificity of practice hypothesis”. JRSM 2016; 6 (12) :45-56
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2461-en.html
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2461-en.html
Abstract: (8324 Views)
According to Specificity of practice hypothesis, availability of visual information
specially during performing tasks witch vision has an important role in improving
the accuracy, causes further performance decrements in No-vision transfer test.
The purpose of the current study was to examine the effects of vision and amount
of practice on accuracy and kinematic of dart throwing. 20 female students of righthanded
who were all novitiate in the skill selected voluntarily and randomly
assigned to full vision and No-vision groups.The subjects following participated in
pretest, performed acquisition phase that consisted two level of modest and
extensive practice (45 trials and 300 trials). 10 minutes after each level of practice,
participants completed transfer trials in a no-vision and no-KR condition. Overall,
Mixed ANOVA (2×3) in acquisition phase revealed that vision improved Dart
throwing accuracy performance. Kinematic analysis revealed no significant
difference between two groups in Wrist flexion, Angular displacement of elbow and
Angular displacement of shoulder. Whereas after 300 trials of practice, there was
significant difference between groups in throwing time and angular velocity of the
dart. After extensive practice, Mixed ANOVA (2×2) showed that, withdrawal of
vision resulted in specificity of practice effects on dart throwing accuracy, but
results of kinematic pattern, regardless of the amount of practice did not support
specificity of practice.
Keywords: Accuracy of dart throwing, kinematic of dart throwing, specificity of practice hypothesis, amount of practice
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
motor behavior
Received: 2017/04/7 | Accepted: 2017/04/7 | Published: 2017/04/7
Received: 2017/04/7 | Accepted: 2017/04/7 | Published: 2017/04/7
References
1. Tremblay, L., Timothy N. Welsh., & Elliot, D. (2001). Specificity Versus Variability: Effects of Practice Conditions on the Use of Afferent Information for Manual Aiming. Motor Control.)5(: 347-360.
2. Proteau, L., Marteniuk, R.G., Girouard, Y., & Dugas, C. (1989). On the type of information used to control and learn an aiming movement after moderate and extensive training. Hum Movement Sci. 6 (2): 181–199.
3. Proteau, L.; Marteniuk, R. G. & Levesque, L. (1992). “A sensorimotor basis for motor learning: Evidence indicating specificity of practice”. Q J Exp Psychol. 44A (3): 557-575.
4. Smyth, M. M. (1989). Visual control of movement patterns and the grammar of action. Acta Psychologica, 70, 253-265.
5. Coull, Tremblay, Elliott. (2001). Examining the specificity of practice hypothesis: Is learning modality specific? Res Q Exercise Sport. 72(4): 345-354.
6. Soucy, M.-C., & Proteau, L. (2001). Development of multiple movement representations with practice: Specificity vs. flexibility. J Motor Behav. 33 (3): 243–254.
7. Elliot, D., & Jaeger, M. (1998). “Practice and the visual control of manual aiming movements”. J Hum Movement Stud. (14): 279-291.
8. Robin, C., Toussaint, L., Blandin, Y., & Vinter. (2004). A Sensory integration in the learning of aiming toward “self-defined” targets. Res Q Exercise Sport. 75(4): 381-387.
9. Proteau, L., Tremblay, L., & DeJaeger, D. (1998). Practice does not diminish the role of visual information in on-line control of a precision walking task: Support for the specificity of practice hypothesis. J Motor Behav. 30(2): 143–150.
10. Yoshida , Cauraugh, Chow. (2004). Specificity of Practice, Visual Information, and Intersegmental Dynamics in Rapid-aiming limp movements. J Motor Behav. 36(3): 281- 290.
11. Blandin, Y., Toussaint, L., & Shea, C.H. (2008). Specificity of practice: interaction between concurrent sensory information and terminal feedback. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 34(4): 994–1000.
12. Toussaint, L., Robin, N., & Blandin, Y. (2010). On the Content of Sensorimotor Representations After Actual and Motor Imagery Practice. Motor Control. 14(2): 159-175.
13. Christine Adams Reed. Manipulation of vision while learning a sensory driven motor task: establishing a boundary to the specificity of practice hypothesis. A thesis for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE, Iowa State University, 2007.
14. Marchant1 D, Clough P, Crawshaw2 M, Levy A. (2009). Novice Motor Skill Performance and Task Experience is Influenced by Attentional Focusing Instructions and Instruction Preferences. IJSEP, 7, 488-502.
15. Khan, A.,& Fanks,l. M. (2000).The effect of practice on component sub movements is dependent on availability of visual feedback. J Motor Behav. 32(3): 227-240.
16. Proteau, L. )2005.( “Visual afferent information dominates other sources of afferent information during mixed practice of a manual aiming task”. Exp Brain Res.161(4): 441-456.
17. Meyer, D.E., Abrams, R.A., Kornblum, S.,Wright, C.E., & Smith, J.E.K. (1998). Optimality in human motor performance: Ideal control of rapid aim movements. Psychol Rev. 95(3): 340-370.
18. Cordo, P.J., & Flanders, M. (1990). Time-dependent effects of kinesthetic input. J Motor Behav. 22(1): 45-65.
19. Flanders, M., & Cordo, P.J. (1998). Kinesthetic and visual control of a bimanual task: Specification of direction and amplitude. J Neurosci . 9 (2): 447-453.
20. Bédard, P., & Proteau, L. (2004). “On-line vs. off-line utilization of peripheral and central visual afferent information to ensure spatial accuracy of goal-directed movements”. Exp Brain Res. 158(1): 75–85.
21. Krigolson, van Gyn, Tremblay. (2006). Is there feedback during visual imagery? Evidence from a specificity of practice paradigm. Can J Exp Psychol. 60 (1): 24-32.
22. Proteau, L., & Isabelle, G. (2002). On the role of visual afferent information for the control of aiming movements toward targets of different sizes. J Motor Behav. 34 (4): 367–384.
23. Robertson, S.; Collins, J.; Elliott, D. & Starkes, J. (1994). “The influence of skill and intermittent vision on dynamic balance”. J Motor Behav. 26(4): 333-339.
24. Lidor, R., & Singer,R. N. (1994). Motor skill acquisition, auditory distracters, and the encoding specificity hypothesis. Percept Motor Skills. 79(3): 1579-1584.
25. Bennett, S.J.; & K. Divids. (1995). “The manipulation of vision during the power lift squat: Exploring of the boundaries the specificity of learning hypothesis”. Res Q Exercise Sport. 66(3): 210-218.
26. Ivens, C.J., & Marteniuk, R.G. (1997). Increased sensitivity to changes in visual feedback with practice. J Motor Behav. 29(4): 326–338.
27. Robin, C., Toussaint, L., Blandin, Y., & Proteau, L. (2005). Specificity of learning in a video-aiming task: Modifying the salience of dynamic visual cues. J Motor Behav. 37(5): 367–376.
28. Krigolson., Tremblay. (2009).The amount of practice really matters: Specificity of practice may be valid only after sufficient practice. Res Q Exercise Sport. 80(2): 197-204.
29. Short, Martin Wayne. Specificity and variability of practice in a rapid aiming task, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses for degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses: UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA; MAY 2000.
30. Park, J.H., & Shea, C.H. (2003). The independence of sequence structure and element production in timing sequences. Res Q Exercise Sport. 74(4): 401-420.
31. Wulf, G., & Schmidt, R. A. (1989). The learning of generalized motor programs: Reducing the relative frequency of knowledge of results enhance memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 15(4): 748-757.
32. Christine Adams Reed. Manipulation of vision while learning a sensory driven motor task: establishing a boundary to the specificity of practice hypothesis. A thesis for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE, ProQuest Information and Learning Company: Iowa State University; 2007.
33. Digby Elliott, Romeo Chua, Barbara J. (1995). Pollock and James Lyons. Optimizing the Use of Vision in Manual Aiming: The Role of Practice. Q J Exp Psychol. 48A (1): 72-83.
34. Hansen, Sheahan, Wu, Lyons, Welsh, Elliott. (2003). Specificity of Learning in Adults With and Without Down Syndrome. Adapt Phys Act Q. (22): 237-252.
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
