The Relative Efficacy of Different forms of Knowledge of Results for the Learning of a New Relative Timing Pattern

The goal of the present study was to determine the relative efficacy of verbal and auditory knowledge of results for promoting learning of a new constrained relative timing pattern. In a series of four experiments we compared the efficiency of verbal knowledge of results to that of auditory knowledge of results. The results of all four experiments revealed that verbal knowledge of result is a very effective source of information to promote learning of a new imposed relative timing pattern. Auditory knowledge of results favoured learning of a new relative timing pattern in a very limited set of circumstances. In the present study, this was only the case when movement velocity remained constant from one segment of the task to the next and if it resulted in an unfamiliar temporal pattern. The results of all four experiments also provided evidence that movement parameterization and relative timing are independent processes that can be developed in parallel.

[1]  P. Viviani,et al.  MOTOR TEMPLATES IN TYPING , 1996 .

[2]  D. C. Shapiro,et al.  Evidence for generalized motor programs using gait pattern analysis. , 1981, Journal of motor behavior.

[3]  Diane Ross,et al.  The effect of auditory and visual models on acquisition of a timing task , 1985 .

[4]  Paolo Viviani,et al.  Timing control in motor sequences , 1991 .

[5]  L. Proteau,et al.  Cognitive Processes Underlying Observational Learning of Motor Skills , 1999 .

[6]  L. Carlton,et al.  Information feedback and the learning multiple-degree-of-freedom activities. , 1992, Journal of motor behavior.

[7]  H Zelaznik,et al.  Feedback in response recognition and production. , 1976, Journal of motor behavior.

[8]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Transfer of learning among motor patterns with different relative timing. , 1988 .

[9]  Dominique Delmez-De Jaeger,et al.  Learning an Imposed Timing in a Sequential Arm Movement , 1995, Perceptual and motor skills.

[10]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis , 1982 .

[11]  G Wulf,et al.  Optimizing Generalized Motor Program and Parameter Learning , 2000, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[12]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  Influence of an unskilled model's practice schedule on observational motor learning , 1990 .

[13]  M. Raibert.  Motor Control and Learning by the State Space Model , 1977 .

[14]  R. Schmidt.  A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. , 1975 .

[15]  H Heuer,et al.  Testing the invariance of relative timing: comment on Gentner (1987). , 1988, Psychological review.

[16]  J. Fagard,et al.  The Development of timing control and temporal organization in coordinated action : invariant relative timing, rhythms, and coordination , 1991 .

[17]  G Wulf,et al.  Reduced feedback frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[18]  R. A. Schmidt,et al.  Reducing Knowledge of Results About Relative Versus Absolute Timing: Differential Effects on Learning. , 1994, Journal of motor behavior.

[19]  D. C. Shapiro,et al.  Control of sequential movements: evidence for generalized motor programs. , 1984, Journal of neurophysiology.

[20]  D. Gentner.  Timing of Skilled Motor Performance: Tests of the Proportional Duration Model. , 1987 .

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

[22]  K. Newell.  Motor skill acquisition. , 1991, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  Herbert Heuer,et al.  Invariant relative timing in motor-program theory , 1991 .

[24]  C H Shea,et al.  Consistent and Variable Practice Conditions: Effects on Relative and Absolute Timing , 2001, Journal of motor behavior.

[25]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  Heiner Deubel,et al.  Reduced feedback frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning , 1993 .