We compared varied model types and their potential differential effects on learning outcomes and consolidation processes when observational practice was interspersed with physical practice. Participants (N = 75) were randomly assigned to one of five groups: (1) unskilled model observation, (2) skilled model observation, (3) mixed-model observation, (4) physical practice only, and (5) no observational or physical practice (control). All were tasked with learning a waveform-matching task. With exception of the control group not involved in acquisition sessions, participants were involved in one pre-test, two acquisition sessions, four retention tests (immediate-post acquisition 1, 24hr post acquisition 1, immediate-post acquisition 2, and approximate 7-day retention), as well as an approximate 7-day transfer test. No differences were demonstrated in consolidation processes or learning outcomes as all groups showed the same pattern of retention and transfer data. Our conclusion is that motor memory processes were not impacted differentially when different models types were used in observational practice that was intermixed with physical practice for the learning of a movement pattern with low task difficulty, and thus similar learning outcomes emerged for all groups.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2018.11.014DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

physical practice
20
learning outcomes
12
model types
8
interspersed physical
8
consolidation processes
8
observational practice
8
model observation
8
acquisition sessions
8
immediate-post acquisition
8
approximate 7-day
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!