biology

The biology essay below has been submitted to us by a student in order to help you with your studies.

The Effects Of Frequency Of Knowledge Motor Learning Biology Essay

Knowledge of result (KR) is the one of the most critical variables affecting motor skill learning (Goodwin, Eckerson, & Voll, 2001; De Oliveira, Corr'a, Basso, & Tani, 2009). KR informs participants about the correction he/she should make in his/her next performance, (Hemayattalab & Rostami, 2010) and it is a one type of feedback that inform learner about the result of movement or skill (De Oliveira et al., 2009). 'The feedback was originally characterized as sensory information that indicates something about actual state of person's movement (Hemayattalab & Rostami, 2010)'. Information of movement is mainly available to learner through his/her own sensorial sources, is called intrinsic feedback. Whenever, there are condition in which intrinsic feedback is absent, in this condition, external feedback should provide to learner (Rice & Hernandez, 2006; De Oliveira et al., 2009).

KR is an external feedback. KR can be provided by manipulating its frequency, temporal characteristics and precision (De Oliveira et al., 2009). KR can be in form of qualitative (You put the shirt on the right way) or quantitative information (You missed by 3 Inches) (Schmidt, 1991; Rice & Hernandez, 2006). KR provided to a learner about performance errors is considered the most important variable (Adams, 1971).

Traditional theory suggests that frequent KR is more effective for performance in acquisition and on retention test. KR strengthens a learner's memory representation (Adams, 1971). But according to Schmidt (1991) & Salmoni, Schmidt, & Walter (1984), learning is dependent on participant's use of perceptual trace in relation to KR and retention is dependent on the perceptual trace and independent of the amount of KR. Retention is dependent on the development of the recognition schema which can update by external feedback like KR and response feedback (Schmidt, 1991; Goodwin & Meeuwsen, 1995). The guidance to learner, inhibits or interfering with other processing activities such as detection, correction of errors, and elaboration of motor plan (Schmidt, 1991).

There are two common hypotheses; Specificity hypothesis and Guidance hypothesis. The specificity hypothesis suggests that the more context of retention test resembles the context of acquisition phase and also performance on retention test would be better (Henry, 1968). In simple word, the specificity hypothesis state that there are similarity between task practiced in acquisition phase and in retention test (Henry, 1968). The guidance hypothesis opposes the traditional viewpoint (Schmidt, 1991; Salmoni et al., 1984). The guidance hypothesis states that frequent KR have both positive and negative effects. The positive effect is that KR guide movements to target by providing information for correcting errors (provide immediate prescription for correcting subsequent response), and also by making learner interested. Negative effects are KR blocks information process activity or processing of KR blocks other important information processing activities and also frequent KR produce poor retention (Schmidt, 1991; Salmoni et al., 1984). Frequent KR could act as a guide for the learner toward the goal of the task during the acquisition trials (Salmoni et al., 1984).

The studies related to KR frequency were carried out using relative simple tasks in a laboratory environment (De Oliveira et al., 2009). There are many studies conducted on the effect of various KR frequencies on learning and retention.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW PAPER:

The purpose of this review paper is to examine the effects of frequency of knowledge of result on motor learning.

REVIEW OF ARTICLE

In this review paper, the studies related to the KR frequency were divided into various sub headings.

REDUCED KR FREQUENCY AND MOTOR SKILL:

The purpose of Lai & Shea (1999)'s study was to examine the effects of reduced KR frequency on the learning of motor skills during constant practice. They conducted two experiments. In experiment one, 45 undergraduate students were included in study. Participates have to depress four keys (2, 4, 6, and 8) with index finger. All participates were informed that their movement time was the elapsed time between the depression of 2 and 8 keys. If participates failed to produce the correct sequence then they have to repeat trial. Participates were randomly assigned to one of five conditions. The five conditions were 100% knowledge of result condition, and four 50% knowledge of result condition (fade, reversed fade, alternative and random). Participants completed 80 practice trials. A 10-trail immediate retention test was performed five minutes and 10 trial delayed retention test was performed after 24 hours. They found that the performance of the 100% KR group on delayed retention test was similar to reduced KR frequency group except for 50% KR reverse fade group. The reverse fade group performed poor than other groups. The conclusion of experiment is that the reduced KR frequency did not enhance learning but it was also not detrimental to learning.

In experiment 2, 24 undergraduate students were recruited in study. Participates were positioned supine on table and computer screen was positioned above participant's eyes. They were 'instructed to exert force against the load cell and produce a pattern of force that resembled as closely as possible the criterion pattern displayed on computer monitor'. There were total of 192 acquisition trials and interval between two sessions was 15 minute. Participates were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The two groups were 100% KR group (received KR after ach acquisition trial) and 50% KR fade group (received KR on progressively fewer trials throughout acquisition). An immediate retention block was administrated 5 minute and a delayed retention test was administrated after 24 hours of completion of acquisition. The data shows that, there are no differences between the 100% KR and 50% KR fade groups in an immediate and delayed retention.

The conclusion of whole study is that 'the manipulation of KR frequency may not provide most productive model from which to evaluate the guidance hypothesis and provide more consistent evidence of negative effect of guidance'.

Johnson & Payne (1966) studied the effect of various frequencies of KR on performance. They found that performance of 0% KR group was poor than other frequencies (50%, 75% and 100% KR). The conclusion of study was that performance with KR is better and superior than without KR. The purpose of Bruechert, Lai, & Shea (2001)'s study was to 'test whether guidance played a role in determining the effect of KR frequency on learning'. 30 right handed subjects were recruited in the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The two groups were 50% KR group and 100% KR group. Both group performed same in acquisition phase. But during retention phase, 50% KR group performed better and they have fewer errors compare to 100% KR group. Similar study was done by Wrisberg (1995). He studied the effect of reduced KR frequency on performance. He found that reducing the KR frequency does not produce more effective learning compare to 100% KR.

SPECIFICITY AND GUIDANCE HYPOTHESIS:

Goodwin et al. (2001) tested prediction of specificity and guidance hypothesis by manipulating relative frequency of Knowledge of result scheduling using a shuffleboard task. According to Prediction of specificity hypothesis, the 00% knowledge of result condition would perform best on retention than 100% knowledge of result and 50% knowledge of result conditions. According to prediction of guidance hypothesis, the 100% knowledge of result condition would perform worst on retention than the 50% knowledge of result condition. 110 volunteer subjects (M=55, F=55) were included in study. Subjects were quasirandomly assigned to one of five conditions. The five conditions were 100% knowledge of result condition, three 50% knowledge of result condition (constant, fade and reversed) and 0% knowledge of result condition. Subjects were made aware of the knowledge of result condition and told that they would be provided knowledge of result according to predetermine schedule. All subjects were instructed the goal was to propel a disc to a 10.34 meter distance. Subjects attempted two practice shots with target in view. After analysis of data they found that the results of retention do not support the prediction of specificity hypothesis, because they found that 00% knowledge of result condition displayed higher constant error on retention compare to other conditions. The result of retention provides little support for prediction of guidance hypothesis because the 100% knowledge of result condition despite good performance and have higher constant error than constant and fade conditions but not the reverse and 00% knowledge of result conditions. They concluded that, analysis of retention did not support prediction of specificity hypothesis and provide little support for the prediction of guidance hypothesis.

Ho & Shea (1978) studied the effect of relative frequency of KR on retention of motor skill. They conducted two experiments. 'The study result of study provided evidence contrary to the Adams's prediction that retention is a function of how many times the feedback stimuli associated with correct response is experienced. The results of study partially support the Schmidt's theory.

'Bandwidth KR is a method of reducing frequency of KR by delivering quantitative KR when performance outcome fall outside a predetermined range of correctness (Goodwin & Meeuwsen, 1995)'. The purpose of Goodwin & Meeuwsen (1995)'s study was to examine the prediction of the guidance and specificity hypotheses by retention tests. They used various range of bandwidth frequency of KR. 120 volunteer female students were recruited in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four bandwidth conditions based on the performance goal of putting golf ball to distance of 4.57 meter. The four bandwidth conditions are BW0% (receive high relative frequency of KR throughout the acquisition phase), BW10% (receive high relative frequencies of KR early in acquisition, but reduced relative frequencies of KR later in acquisition as their performance improved with practice), Shrinking-BW (receive low relative frequencies of KR early in acquisition, but higher relative frequencies of KR later in acquisition when the bandwidths narrowed), and Expanding-BW conditions (receive high relative frequencies of KR early in acquisition, but smaller relative frequencies of KR later in acquisition when the bandwidths widened). KR were provided when subjects performance outcome fell outside the criteria but when its come within criteria, KR were not provided. All participants were instructed that task is to put golf ball to a distance of 4.57 meter. Acquisition phase consisted of 100 trials and 90 second rest was given after 20 trials. Then after double transfer design was employed in which subjects were divided into two groups; (1) no KR retention condition and (2) KR retention condition. Both retention tests consisted of 20 trails. The results suggest that, the bandwidth 10% and expanding bandwidth performed significantly smaller under the no KR retention condition compare to the bandwidth 0%. And value on the 48 hours retention test were smaller for bandwidth 10% and expanding band width compare to the bandwidth 0% condition. The results of study support the specificity hypothesis. The conclusion of study is that, 'receiving high relative frequency of KR at the end of the acquisition phase is as detrimental to learning as receiving high relative frequencies of KR throughout acquisition'.

KR AND TASK COMPLEXITY

The purpose of De Oliveira et al. (2009)'s study was to investigate the hypothesis that for task with high complexity, high frequency of KR will be necessary. 120 students were recruited. In the study, the simple task was throwing ball with backward-forward pendulous movement of extended arm and complex task was performed same pendulous movement followed by an overhead circular movement of arm. Participates were randomly assigned to one of eight groups. The eight groups were 100% KR simple task group, 50% KR simple task group, 75% KR simple task group, 50% KR simple task group, 25% KR simple task group,100% KR complex task group, 50% KR, 75% KR complex task group, 50% KR complex task group and 25% KR complex task group. Subjects performed 90 trials in acquisition phase and 10 trails in transfer test. 100% KR frequency groups performed poor in acquisition phase and better in transfer test but 25% KR frequency groups performed better in both phases. The results shows that there are no effect of task complexity on skill and 25% KR frequency group performed better and accurate in transfer test than other groups.

Similar study was done by Chiviacowsky & Godinho (2001). The purpose of Chiviacowsky & Godinho (2001)'s study was to evaluate the relationship between the frequency of KR and complexity. They did not found any interaction between the frequency of KR and complexity.

KR AND GENERALIZED MOTOR PROGRAM (GMP)

Wrisberg & Wulf (1997) studied the effect of reduced frequency of KR on generalized motor program learning. 60 students were recruited in the study. The subjects were divided into three groups randomly; 100%KR group (received KR after every practice trial), 67%KR group (received KR on 60 of the 90 trials) and 67% advance information (KR group KR on 60 of the 90 trials). They performed total 90 trials and task required participates to produce 3 movement patterns that shared same timing and amplitude. In practice phase, all three groups show improvement in generalized motor program learning. But in retention test, the 67% KR group demonstrate a more accurate and stable generalized motor program than 67% advanced KR group and 100% KR group. The study results shows that increase certainty of KR decreased the generalized motor program development.

The purpose of Ho & Shea (1978)'s study was identity the effect of reduced KR frequency on constant and serial practice and to determine if increased response stability is associated with increased GMP learning. 45 right handed undergraduate students were recruited in the study. They were asked to sit on a chair and adjust the keyboard of computer so they could use numeric keyboard comfortably. Participates have to depress four keys (2, 4, 6, and 8) with index finger. Before each trial, the relative goal segment ratio (22.2%, 44.4%, and 33.3%) and total movement time (GMT=700, 900, 1100) were presented on screen. After each trial GMT and movement time were displayed on screen. Participants were randomy assigned to one of four acquisition conditions. The four conditions 100% C (100% KR, constant practice), 100% V (100% KR, various practice, 50% C (50% KR, constant practice), and 50% V (50% KR, various practice). the study consisted of three phases; acquisition, retention and transfer. 108 trails were performed in acquisition phase. The retention and transfer tests were performed after 24 hours of completion of acquisition phase. In acquisition phase, the constant groups produced less errors compare to various groups and the50% KR conditions enhance GMP stability than 100% KR condition. In retention test, 50% KR conditions have less error compare to 100%KR. In transfer test, the constant practice groups have low relative timing errors than various practice groups. The conclusion of study was that 'reduced KR frequency enhances GMP learning in the constant practice conditions' and also response stability can 'improve either by reducing KR frequency or by reducing the number of task variations'.

KR AND DEVELOPMENTAL DELAY

There are lots of studies done on the effect of frequency of KR on learning in normal or health individual but limited not neurological patients (Hemayattalab & Rostami, 2010). The purpose of Hemayattalab & Rostami (2010)'s study was to determine the effect of KR on the learning of dart in individual with cerebral palsy. 24 cerebral palsy type 1 in which half side of body had functional and motor disability patients (age range 7-15 year) were recruited in the study. Participants learned how to perform throwing dart. The study was consisted of pretest, practice sessions, feedback provision to each group, an acquisition and retention tests. Participates were randomly assigned to one of three groups. The three groups were 100% KR group (received KR in all trials), 50% KR group (received KR in 50% of trials), and 0% KR group (received no KR). They practiced total 30 throws. After practice, an acquisition test was run. And retention test was run three day later. In acquisition phase, the 100% KR group performed better and score higher than 50% KR and 0%KR groups. In retention phase, the 50% KR group performed better and score higher than 100% KR and 0%KR groups. The conclusion of study was that 'participants with cerebral palsy have ability of acquiring and retaining a new motor skill under the condition of feedback provision and too much feedback interferes with learning of task in cerebral palsy patient'

Previously similar study was done by Rice & Hernandez (2006). The purpose of Rice & Hernandez (2006)'s study was to evaluate the effect of high versus low frequency KR in individual with developmental delay and a group of age matched average individual. 17 (M=6, F=11) participants with developmental delay were recruited in the study. There was a sample of 16 individual age and sex matched to the participants with developmental delay. Participates were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. The two conditions were 100% KR condition and 50% KR condition. The task was to make the yellow bar match the position of the blue bar on the laptop screen by moving the access device. In Participants with developmental delay, 100% KR group perform better than 50% KR group in acquisition phase and 50% KR group perform better than 100% KR group in retention phase. So results suggest that, KR has effect on performance during acquisition phase but not during retention phase. That means that frequent KR interferes with retention of skill in individuals with development delay.

KR THROUGH OBSERVATION

Badetes & Blandin (2004) studied whether KR on the model's performance is of the utmost importance for observational learning. 72 undergraduate right-handed students were recruited in the study. Participates were randomly assigned to one of four groups (three observer group and one control group). They found that reduced KR frequency during observation continued for the physical practice phase.

After one year, Badets & Blandin (2005) studied 'whether bandwidth KR during observation of a model's performance enhances motor skill learning'. 28 undergraduate students were recruited in the study. Participants were sat in front of wooden board (with nine microswitches) and asked to sequentially press four microswitches with right hand in a prescribed order and total movement time (800, 900, and 1000 ms). The study was conducted in four experimental phases. In first phase, subjects performed 18 trials without KR. Second phase was an observation phase and in this phase, they watched 63 cm video screen a model who performed 72 trails. The third and fourth phases were identical to the pretest. Participants were randomly assigned into two groups. The two groups were the bandwidth group (received KR about the model's performance only when his performance fell outside the criteria for a correct response) and yoked group (received KR on the same trials as the bandwidth group did but were not told that the KR was only about incorrect performances). They performed two retention tests (after 10 minute and 24 hours). They found that bandwidth KR during observation was beneficial to performance in both retention tests (after 10 minutes and 24 hours). But the effect of bandwidth KR on performance was found only in after 10 minute retention test. The bandwidth group performed better than yoked group when same relative quantitative KR frequency was provided during observation. Therefore, bandwidth KR is an efficient procedure for enhancing motor learning.

KR AND ERROR DETECTION

The purpose of Bruechert, Lai, & Shea (2003)'s study was to determine 'if error estimation capabilities are enhanced as a result of reduced frequency KR in variable practice relative 100% KR conditions in simple, single impulse tasks'. 24 right handed undergraduate students were recruited in the study. The participants were first sit in a chair and grip dynamometer as hard as they could. They performed three time and highest of three were considered as a maximum grip strength. The target force was scaled to 30, 50, and 70% of maximum grip strength power of each participant. The participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. The two conditions were 100% KR (received feedback after each trial) and 50% KR (received feedback on trails 1-3 but not on 4-6) conditions. 72 trials were performed during acquisition phase and 12 trials during retention phase. The 50% KR group had low total error and less variability than 100% KR group in acquisition phase. In retention phase, 50% KR group performed better than 100% KR group. The conclusion of study was that reduced KR frequency has low error compare to too frequent KR.

Another similar type study was done by Guadagnoli & Kohl (2001). The purpose of Guadagnoli & Kohl (2001)'s study was to determine the relationship between error estimation and KR. 64 undergraduate students were recruited in the study. 'The study was a 2 (error estimation frequency) X 2 (KR frequency) between subjects design'. The two level of error estimation frequency were 100% (recurred to estimate their response produced error after each trial) and 0% (not required to error estimate or not informed about error estimation). The two level of KR frequency were 100% (received KR after each trial) and 20% (received KR after every fifth trail). The two dependent variable were root mean square error (RMSE=accuracy in responding) and variable error (VE=variability or consistency in responding). The force production was measured by force transducer. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two KR group and one of two estimation condition. In acquisition phase, participants performed the total 150 trials (10 blocks of 15 trials) of force production. After 24 hours, participants performed retention test and in retention test they performed 15 trials of force production. They found that 'when participants estimated response errors during acquisition, the 100% KR frequency condition enhance retention performance (decreased error and increased consistency) than 20% KR frequency'. And when they did not estimate response error during acquisition phase, the 20% KR group performed better than 100% group. The study result shows clear relationship between error estimation and KR frequency on performance.

SUMMARY

Knowledge of result (KR) is the one of the most critical variables affecting motor skill learning (Goodwin et al., 2001; De Oliveira et al., 2009). KR is an external feedback and can be provided by manipulating its frequency, temporal characteristics and precision (De Oliveira et al., 2009). Traditional theory suggests that frequent KR is more effective for performance in acquisition and on retention test. KR strengthens a learner's memory representation (Adams, 1971). But according to Schmidt (1991) & Salmoni et al. (1984), Learning is dependent on participant's use of perceptual trace in relation to KR and retention is dependent on the perceptual trace and independent of the amount of KR (Schmidt, 1991; Salmoni et al., 1984).

Performance with KR is better and superior than without KR (Johnson & Payne, 1966). The reduced KR frequency during observation continued for the physical practice phase (Badetes & Blandin, 2004). The reducing the KR frequency performed better and they have fewer errors compare to 100% KR group (Bruechert et al., 2001; Goodwin & Meeuwsen, 1995; Ho & Shea, 1978). But two study found that, the reducing the KR frequency does not produce more effective learning compare to 100% KR (Wrisberg, 1995; Lai & Shea, 1999). The increase certainty of KR decreased the generalized motor program development (Wrisberg & Wulf, 1997). Frequent KR interferes with retention of skill in individuals with development delay and cerebral palsy (Rice & Hernandez, 2006; Hemayattalab & Rostami, 2010).

Goodwin & Meeuwsen (1995)'s study support the specificity hypothesis. But three studies (Ho & Shea, 1978; Goodwin et al., 2001; Lai & Shea, 1999) support guidance hypothesis. There are no effects of task complexity on skill (Corr'a, Basso, & Tani, 2009) and Chiviacowsky & Godinho (2001) did not found any interaction between the frequency of KR and complexity. There is a relationship between error estimation and KR frequency on performance (Guadagnoli & Kohl, 2001) and the reduced KR frequency has low error compare to too frequent KR (Bruechert et al., 2003).

LIMITATION AND FUTURE DIRECTION:

Two major limitations were: (1) Majority of study has similar type of sample (students). (2) All studies had studied different motor skill and protocol, so it's very difficult to merge all together. There is still need of further research with common protocol and various populations.

CONCLUSION:

The conclusion of paper is that reducing frequency of KR has more benefits in healthy individuals and also in individuals with developmental delay compare to 100% KR. All studies except one study support guidance hypothesis that means frequent KR have negative effects on motor leaning compare to reduced KR frequency.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATION:

Reducing the frequency of KR will give better retention compare to frequent (100% KR) during motor learning. So it is necessary to give feedback when it is needed, not continuously.


Request Removal

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal:

Request the removal of this essay


More from UK Essays