Volume 8, Issue 15 (8-2018)
JRSM 2018, 8(15): 41-53 |
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:
Nezakat Alhoseini M, Soleimani E, Bahram A. Effects of cognitive functions on feedback request strategy and learning of a perceptual motor task. JRSM 2018; 8 (15) :41-53
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2703-en.html
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2703-en.html
Abstract: (7539 Views)
Taking individuals' cognitive abilities into consideration can play an important role in the initial stages of learning motor skills. So, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of cognitive functions on feedback request strategy and learning of a perceptual motor task. A number of 60 university male students with a mean age of 22/4 years (SD = 1/99) were selected through convenience sampling and were assigned to 6 groups according to their intelligence quotient, memory quotient and attention scores. All participants performed 100 badminton long services during the practice phase, and 20 services, during the retention and transfer phases. Wechsler Revised Intelligence Test, Wechsler memory scale, Toulouse and Pieron Test, and Scott and Fax Badminton Long Service were used to collect the data on intelligence quotient, memory quotient, attention, and badminton long service performance, respectively. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures and Independent t-test (α=0/05) were used to analyze the collected data. The analyses demonstrated that intelligence quotient, memory quotient, and attention had a significant effect on decreasing feedback request frequency during the acquisition phase, and increasing badminton long service scores during the acquisition, retention and transfer phases. Therefore, it can be concluded that bearing individuals' cognitive abilities in mind during motor skills training can be beneficial.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
motor behavior
Received: 2015/08/7 | Accepted: 2017/02/20 | Published: 2018/08/15
Received: 2015/08/7 | Accepted: 2017/02/20 | Published: 2018/08/15
References
1. نزاکت الحسینی، مریم، بهرام، عباس، فرخی، احمد، 1391، اثر بازخورد خودکنترلی بر یادگیری برنامه حرکتی تعمیم یافته و پارامتر طی تمرین بدنی و مشاهده ای، پژوهش در مدیریت ورزشی و رفتار حرکتی، دوره 2، شماره 4، 25-39.
2. نزاکت الحسینی، مریم، بهرام، عباس، شفیع زاده، محسن، فرخی، احمد، ولف، گابریل، 1388، اثر بازخورد خودکنترلی بر یادگیری زمان بندی نسبی و مطلق، نشریه علوم حرکتی و ورزش (پژوهش در مدیریت ورزشی و رفتار حرکتی فعلی)، دوره 7، شماره 13، 43-56.
3. استرنبرگ، رابرت، 1387، روانشناسی شناختی، مترجمان: خرازی، کمال، حجازی، الهه، ویراست چهارم، انتشارات سمت، 20-30.
4. نظرپوری، شهرام، خلجی، حسن، مردانه، فرهاد، 1392، ارتباط بین بهره هوشی، هوش هیجانی و آمادگی حرکتی با یادگیری مهارت های پنجه و سرویس والیبال. مجله رفتار حرکتی، شماره 12 ، 141 -162.
5. گشمردی، محمدرضا،1384 نقش حافظه در فرآیند یادگیری زبان خارجی،. 86-95.
6. عابدی، محمدرضا، امیدی، عبدالله، رضایت، اکبر، 1374، هنجاریابی و بررسی اعتبار و پایایی مقیاس هوش بزرگسالان تجدید نظر شده وکسلر (WAIS-R) در ایران، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، انستیتو روان پزشکی تهران. 80-100.
7. گنجی، حمزه، ثابت، مهرداد، 1382، روان سنجی، تهران، ساوالان، چ سوم، 160-149.
8. اورنگی، مریم، عاطف، وحید، محمد کاظم، عشایری، حسین، 1381، هنجاریابی مقیاس تجدید نظر شده حافظه وکسلر، نشریه روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، 66-56
9. رضائیان، اکرم، رضائیان، مهدی، بهزاد فرد، مهسا، 1388، تاثیر مصرف مکمل خوراکی آهن بر ظرفیت توجه دانش آموزان دختر دبیرستانی، مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی خراسان شمالی، شماره 2، 55-47.
10. مختاری، پونه، شجاعی، معصومه، دانا، امیر، 1386، تاثیر تمرین مشاهده ای بر یادگیری سرویس بلند بدمینتون با تاکید بر نقش میانجی گری خودکارآمدی، نشریه حرکت، شماره 32، 131-117.
11. آناستازی، آن،1371 تفاوت های فردی، ترجمه جواد طهوریان، مشهد. انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی،.50-60.
12. Edwards, W. H, 2011, Motor learning and control: From theory to practice. Yolanda Cossio. 1e, 293.
13. Adams, J. A., Goetz, E., & Marshall, P, 1972, Response feedback and motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92: 391-397. [DOI:10.1037/h0032358]
14. Schmidt, R. A. & Wrisberg, C. A, 2010, Motor learning and performance: A problem-based learning approach, 4th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 461.
15. Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B, 1984, Knowledge of results and motor learning. a review and critical reappraisal, Psychol Bull, 95: 355-386. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.355]
16. Sigrist, R. Rauter, G. Riener, R. & Peter, W, 2011, Self-Controlled Feedback for a Complex Motor Task, Journal of BIO Web of Conferences, 0084-p:1-4. [DOI:10.1051/bioconf/20110100084]
17. Janelle, C. M., Barba, D. A., Frehlich, S. G., Tennant, L. K., & Caurraugh, H, 1997, Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and self-controlled learning environment, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68: 269-279. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.1997.10608008]
18. Jae, T. Patterson, Michael, J. Carter, & Steve, H, 2013, Self-controlled KR schedules: Does repetition order matter? Human Movement Science, 32, 567-579. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2013.03.005]
19. Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D, 2004, Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning, Journal of Motor Behavior, 36: 212-224. [DOI:10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224]
20. Kelley, C. M., Mclaughlin, A. C, 2012, Individual differences in the benefits of feedback for learning, Journal of Human Factors, 54: 26-35. [DOI:10.1177/0018720811423919]
21. Reber, A. S; Gullickson, K, 1996, Dictionary of psychology, 41(8): 848. [DOI:10.1037/003103]
22. Magill, R. A, 2007, Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 511-527.
23. Wulf, G. Shea, CH. & Matschiner, S, 1998, Frequent feedback enhances complex motor skill learning, Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 180-192. [DOI:10.1080/00222899809601335]
24. Schmidt, R. A & Lee, T. D, 2005, Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis, Cham paign, IL: Human Kinetics, 60-100.
25. Tomas, E. L, Jeison, D. F, 1972, Intelligence scores as a function of experimentally established social relationships between child and examiner, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 47, 354-358. [DOI:10.1037/h0060151]
26. Ismail, A.H. Kephart, N. & Cowell, C.C, 1963, Utilization of motor aptitude tests in predicting academic achievement, Indianapolis, 19, 32-43.
27. Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O, 2002, Individual differences in working memory within a nomological network of cognitive and perceptual speed abilities, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 131: 567-589. [DOI:10.1037/0096-3445.131.4.567]
28. Ackerman, P. L, 2000, A reappraisal of the ability determinants of individual differences in skilled performance, Psychologische Beitr¨age, 42: 4-17.
29. Wagner, R. K, 2000, Practical intelligence, New York: Cambridge University press, 380-395. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511807947.018]
30. Engle, R. W. & Kane, M. J, 2004, Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control, Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 145-198. [DOI:10.1016/S0079-7421(03)44005-X]
31. Boschke, M. S. J, 2002, Memory for the functional characteristics of climbing walls, Journal of Motor Behavior, 34, 25-36. [DOI:10.1080/00222890209601928]
32. Poon, P. P. L, & Rodgers, W. M, 2000, Learning and remembering strategies of novice and advanced jazz dancers for skill level appropriate routines, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 135-144. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2000.10608891]
33. Lee, M. D., & Wetzels, R, 2010, Individual differences in attention during category learning, In R. Catrambone & S. Ohlsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 387{392), Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
34. Kahneman, D, 1973, Attention and effort, New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, 112-135.
35. Anshel, M. H, 1990, An information processing approach to teaching motor skill, Journal of Physical Education, May/June, 70-75. [DOI:10.1080/07303084.1990.10604523]
36. Ambinder, M. S. & Simons, D. J, 2006, Individual differences in attention capture, Annual Meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, 28.
37. Lee, T. D., Swinnen, S. P., & Serrien, D. J, 1994, Cognitive effort and motor learning, Quest, 46: 328-344. [DOI:10.1080/00336297.1994.10484130]
38. Patterson, T. J., & Carter, M, 2010, Learner regulated knowledge of results during the acquisition of multiple timing goals. Journal of Human Movement Science, 29: 214-227. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2009.12.003]
39. Sweller, J, 1988, Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning, Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285. [DOI:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4]
40. Morris, C. D. Bransford, J. D. & Franks, J. J, 1977, Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing, Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533. [DOI:10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80016-9]
41. Ackerman, P. L, 1987, Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives, Psychological Bulletin, 102, 3-27. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.3]
42. Michael, J. Carter, Jae, T. Patterson, 2012, Self-controlled knowledge of results: Age-related differences in motor learning, strategies, and error detection, Human Movement Science, 31, 1459-1472. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2012.07.008]
43. Robertson, S. D, 1997, Individual differences in timing ability, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19, S99.
44. Ackerman, P. L, 1987. Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives. Psychological bulletin, 102(1), p.3. [DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.3]
45. Ackerman, P. L. Kanfer, R. & Goff, M, 1995, Cognitive and noncognitive determinants and consequences of complex skill acquisition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 270-304. [DOI:10.1037/1076-898X.1.4.270]
46. Ackerman, P. L, 1988, Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 117: 288-318. [DOI:10.1037/0096-3445.117.3.288]
47. Parsons, K. C., & Herold. M. D, 1980, Individual Differences in Performance Feedback Preferences, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50: 15-25.
48. Ackerman, P. L, 1986, Individual differences in information processing: An investigation of intellectual abilities and task performance during practice, Intelligence, 10, 101-139. [DOI:10.1016/0160-2896(86)90010-3]
49. Mac Neveill, M. Cattel, N.S. & Vagner, B. E, 1997, Physical assistance devices in complex motor skill learning, Benefits of a self-controlled practice schedule, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70, 265-272. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.1999.10608045]
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
