练习计划影响学习者纠正错误的方式:来自上下文干扰研究的二次分析

IF 0.8 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Motor Learning and Development Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1123/jmld.2022-0021
Sarah Taylor, B. Fawver, Joseph L. Thomas, A. M. Williams, K. Lohse
{"title":"练习计划影响学习者纠正错误的方式:来自上下文干扰研究的二次分析","authors":"Sarah Taylor, B. Fawver, Joseph L. Thomas, A. M. Williams, K. Lohse","doi":"10.1123/jmld.2022-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contextual interference is an established phenomenon in learning research; random practice schedules are associated with poorer performance, but superior learning, compared with blocked practice schedules. We present a secondary analysis of N = 84 healthy young adults, replicating the contextual interference effect in a time estimation task. We used the determinant of a correlation matrix to measure the amount of order in participant responses. We calculated this determinant in different phase spaces: trial space, the determinant of the previous five trials (lagged constant error 0–4); and target space, the determinant of the previous five trials of the same target. In trial space, there was no significant difference between groups (p = .98) and no Group × Lag interaction (p = .54), although there was an effect of Lag (p < .01). In target space, there were effects of Group (p = .02), Lag (p < .01), and a Group × Lag interaction (p = .03). Ultimately, randomly scheduled practice was associated with adaptive corrections but positive correlations between errors from trial to trial (e.g., overshoots followed by smaller overshoots). Blocked practice was associated with more adaptive corrections but uncorrelated responses. Our findings suggest that random practice leads to the retrieval and updating of the target from memory, facilitating long-term retention and transfer.","PeriodicalId":37368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Practice Schedules Affect How Learners Correct Their Errors: Secondary Analysis From a Contextual Interference Study\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Taylor, B. Fawver, Joseph L. Thomas, A. M. Williams, K. Lohse\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jmld.2022-0021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Contextual interference is an established phenomenon in learning research; random practice schedules are associated with poorer performance, but superior learning, compared with blocked practice schedules. We present a secondary analysis of N = 84 healthy young adults, replicating the contextual interference effect in a time estimation task. We used the determinant of a correlation matrix to measure the amount of order in participant responses. We calculated this determinant in different phase spaces: trial space, the determinant of the previous five trials (lagged constant error 0–4); and target space, the determinant of the previous five trials of the same target. In trial space, there was no significant difference between groups (p = .98) and no Group × Lag interaction (p = .54), although there was an effect of Lag (p < .01). In target space, there were effects of Group (p = .02), Lag (p < .01), and a Group × Lag interaction (p = .03). Ultimately, randomly scheduled practice was associated with adaptive corrections but positive correlations between errors from trial to trial (e.g., overshoots followed by smaller overshoots). Blocked practice was associated with more adaptive corrections but uncorrelated responses. Our findings suggest that random practice leads to the retrieval and updating of the target from memory, facilitating long-term retention and transfer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Motor Learning and Development\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Motor Learning and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2022-0021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2022-0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

语境干扰是学习研究中的一种普遍现象;与固定的练习计划相比,随机的练习计划与较差的表现有关,但与更好的学习有关。我们对N = 84名健康年轻人进行了二次分析,在时间估计任务中复制了上下文干扰效应。我们使用相关矩阵的行列式来衡量参与者回答中的顺序量。我们在不同的相空间中计算这个行列式:试验空间,前五次试验的行列式(滞后常数误差0-4);目标空间,是同一目标前五次试验的行列式。在试验空间中,组间无显著差异(p = 0.98),组与组间无交互作用(p = 0.54),但有Lag的影响(p < 0.01)。在靶区,有组效应(p = 0.02)、Lag效应(p < 0.01)和组与Lag交互作用(p = 0.03)。最终,随机安排的练习与适应性修正有关,但与试验之间的误差呈正相关(例如,超调之后是较小的超调)。阻断练习与更多的适应性纠正相关,但与反应不相关。我们的研究结果表明,随机练习导致目标从记忆中检索和更新,促进长期保留和转移。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Practice Schedules Affect How Learners Correct Their Errors: Secondary Analysis From a Contextual Interference Study
Contextual interference is an established phenomenon in learning research; random practice schedules are associated with poorer performance, but superior learning, compared with blocked practice schedules. We present a secondary analysis of N = 84 healthy young adults, replicating the contextual interference effect in a time estimation task. We used the determinant of a correlation matrix to measure the amount of order in participant responses. We calculated this determinant in different phase spaces: trial space, the determinant of the previous five trials (lagged constant error 0–4); and target space, the determinant of the previous five trials of the same target. In trial space, there was no significant difference between groups (p = .98) and no Group × Lag interaction (p = .54), although there was an effect of Lag (p < .01). In target space, there were effects of Group (p = .02), Lag (p < .01), and a Group × Lag interaction (p = .03). Ultimately, randomly scheduled practice was associated with adaptive corrections but positive correlations between errors from trial to trial (e.g., overshoots followed by smaller overshoots). Blocked practice was associated with more adaptive corrections but uncorrelated responses. Our findings suggest that random practice leads to the retrieval and updating of the target from memory, facilitating long-term retention and transfer.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Motor Learning and Development
Journal of Motor Learning and Development Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Journal of Motor Learning and Development (JMLD) publishes peer-reviewed research that advances the understanding of movement skill acquisition and expression across the lifespan. JMLD aims to provide a platform for theoretical, translational, applied, and innovative research related to factors that influence the learning or re-learning of skills in individuals with various movement-relevant abilities and disabilities.
期刊最新文献
Virtual Motivation: The Psychological and Transfer of Learning Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality Practice A Single Session of Mindfulness Meditation Expedites Immediate Motor Memory Consolidation to Improve Wakeful Offline Learning The Effect of Part and Whole Practice on Learning Lay-Up Shot Skill in Young and Adolescent Male Students Does Sedentary Behavior Predict Motor Competence in Young Children? The Path to Translating Focus of Attention Research into Canadian Physiotherapy, Part 2: Physiotherapist Interviews Reveal Impacting Factors and Barriers to Focus of Attention Use
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1