Practice schedule and cognitive style interaction in learning a maze task

In the present study the effects of contextual interference on the retention and transfer performance of reflectives and impulsives on a maze task were studied. Forty-seven subjects were randomly assigned to either a high contextual interference group or to a low contextual interference group. Within the two groups subjects were further classified according to their preferred modes of responding. Retention and transfer were measured immediately following practice and after a 4-week delay. The dependent variables were tracing time and errors. Reflectives made fewer errors and moved more quickly after practising under conditions of high contextual interference. Impulsives tended to have fewer errors after practising under conditions of high contextual interference but moved more slowly. Based on these results it was suggested that trainers consider individual differences in reflectivity-impulsivity before designing particular practice schedules.

[1]  R. Magill,et al.  American Psychological Association, Inc. The Locus of Contextual Interference in Motor-Skill Acquisition i , 2022 .

[2]  T. D. Lee,et al.  Influence of practice schedule on testing schema theory predictions in adults. , 1985, Journal of motor behavior.

[3]  M. Languis,et al.  Cognitive science and teacher education , 1985 .

[4]  John B. Shea,et al.  Context Effects in Memory and Learning Movement Information , 1983 .

[5]  L. Cronbach,et al.  Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions , 1977 .

[6]  R. Magill,et al.  Can Forgetting Facilitate Skill Acquisition , 1985 .

[7]  Deborah A. Day,et al.  Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. , 1964 .

[8]  Phillip L. Ackerman,et al.  Individual Differences in Automatic and Controlled Information Processing. , 1984 .

[9]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[10]  S. Messer,et al.  Reflection-impulsivity: A review. , 1976 .

[11]  J. Shea,et al.  Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. , 1979 .

[12]  J. Kagan,et al.  Modifiability of an impulsive tempo. , 1966, Journal of educational psychology.

[13]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[14]  John Annett,et al.  The Retention of a Skill Following Distributed Training , 1985 .

[15]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[16]  Cognitive Style and Learner Strategy Interaction in the Performance of Primary and Related Maze Tasks , 1985 .

[17]  Ronald W. Thompson,et al.  Impulsivity: From Theoretical Constructs To Applied Interventions , 1983 .

[18]  J. Annett,et al.  Transfer of Training: A Review of Research and Practical Implications , 1985 .

[19]  M Whitehurst,et al.  The effects of contextual interference on females with varied experience in open sport skills. , 1982, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[20]  A. D. Fisk,et al.  Memory as a function of attention, level of processing, and automatization. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  Richard A. Magill,et al.  Memory and control of action , 1983 .