排序方式： 共有10条查询结果，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1
1.
2.
Recent studies (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005) have shown that learners prefer to receive feedback after they believe they had a "good" rather than "poor" trial. The present study followed up on this finding and examined whether learning would benefit if individuals received feedback after good relative to poor trials. Participants practiced a task that required them to throw beanbags at a target with their nondominant arm. Vision was prevented during and after the throws. All participants received knowledge of results (KR) on three trials in each 6-trial block. While one group (KR good) received KR for the three most effective trials in each block, another (KR poor) received feedback for the three least effective trials in each block. There were no group differences in practice. However the KR good group showed learning advantages on a delayed retention test (without KR). These results demonstrated that learning is facilitated if feedback is provided after good rather than poor trials. The findings are interpreted as evidence for a motivational function of feedback. 相似文献
3.
4.
Abstract This paper examines whether self-controlled feedback schedules enhance learning, because they are more tailored to the performers' needs than externally controlled feedback schedules. Participants practiced a sequential timing task. One group of learners (self-control) was provided with feedback whenever they requested it, whereas another group (yoked) had no influence on the feedback schedule. The self-control group showed learning benefits on a delayed transfer test. Questionnaire results revealed that self-control learners asked for feedback primarily after good trials andyoked learners preferred to receive feedback after good trials. Analyses demonstrated that errors were lower on feedback than no-feedback trials for the self-control group but not for the yoked group. Thus, self-control participants appeared to use a strategy for requesting feedback. This might explain learning advantages of self-controlled practice. 相似文献
5.
This paper examines whether self-controlled feedback schedules enhance learning, because they are more tailored to the performers' needs than externally controlled feedback schedules. Participants practiced a sequential timing task. One group of learners (self-control) was provided with feedback whenever they requested it, whereas another group (yoked) had no influence on the feedback schedule. The self-control group showed learning benefits on a delayed transfer test. Questionnaire results revealed that self-control learners asked for feedback primarily after good trials and yoked learners preferred to receive feedback after good trials. Analyses demonstrated that errors were lower on feedback than no-feedback trials for the self-control group but not for the yoked group. Thus, self-control participants appeared to use a strategy for requesting feedback. This might explain learning advantages of self-controlled practice. 相似文献
6.
This study investigated the influence of normative feedback on learning a sequential timing task. In addition to feedback about their performance per trial, two groups of participants received bogus normative feedback about a peer group's average block-to-block improvement after each block of 10 trials. Scores indicated either greater (better group) or less (worse group) than the average improvement, respectively. On the transfer test 1 day later which required producing novel absolute movement times, the better group demonstrated more effective learning than the worse group. These findings add to the mounting evidence that motivational factors affect motor skill learning. 相似文献
7.
Recent studies (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005) have shown that learners prefer to receive feedback after they believe they had a “good” rather than “poor”trial. The present study followed up on this finding and examined whether learning would benefit if individuals received feedback after good relative to poor trials. Participants practiced a task that required them to throw beanbags at a target with their nondominant arm. Vision was prevented during and after the throws. All participants received knowledge of results (KR) on three trials in each 6-trial block. While one group (KR good) received KR for the three most effective trials in each block, another (KR poor) received feedback for the three least effective trials in each block. There were no group differences in practice. However, the KR good group showed learning advantages on a delayed retention test (without KR). These results demonstrated that learning is facilitated if feedback is provided after good rather than poor trials. The findings are interpreted as evidence for a motivational function of feedback. 相似文献
8.
Suzete Chiviacowsky Gabriele Wulf Franklin Laroque de Medeiros Angélica Kaefer Go Tani 《Research quarterly for exercise and sport》2013,84(3):405-410
Abstract The leg strength of 70 college men was measured in a position designed to involve the power thrust of the major muscle groups used in the vertical jump. The subjects then performed a modified Sargent jump that used no arm snap. Although the reliability of all measures was high, individual differences in the ratio of tested strength to body mass showed only a low and nonsignificant correlation with jumping performance. The results are interpreted to support the hypothesis that strength exerted against a dynamometer involves a different neuromotor pattern than strength exerted by the muscles during a movement. Tables of means, variabilities, and intercorrelations are included in the report. 相似文献
9.
10.
The study follows up on the contention that self-controlled feedback schedules benefit learning because they are more tailored to the performers' needs than externally controlled feedback schedules (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002). Under this assumption, one would expect learning advantages for individuals who decide whether they want to receive feedback after a trial rather than before a trial. Participants practiced a sequential timing task, and all could decide the trials on which they received feedback. One group ("self-after") decided after every trial whether they wanted to receive feedback for that trial while another group ("self-before") made that decision before each trial The self-after group showed learning benefits on a delayed transfer test (novel absolute timing requirements) with regard to overall timing and relative-timing accuracy. Thus, self-controlled feedback was more effective when the learner could make a decision about receiving feedback after the trial. This seems to support the view that self-controlled feedback benefits learning, because learners can make a decision about feedback based on their performance on a given trial. 相似文献
1