|
Researched
and Composed by
Jacob Wilson, BSc. (Hons), MSc. CSCS and
Gabriel “Venom” Wilson, BSc. (Hons), CSCS
Abstract
Hull (1943) was
the first to quantitatively differentiate between performance and
learning. Hull’s equation demonstrated the temporary nature of
performance as well as the relatively permanent nature of learning. In
light of this, the learning paradigm is used to infer that learning has
taken place and is comprised of acquisition and retention trials.
Acquisition refers to initial practice conditions. Retention refers to
trials performed after a period of rest to assess learning. The purpose of this paper was to review
the learning paradigm.
Recommended Readings
Hull’s Quantitative Equation on Human Performance
Introduction
Learning can be
defined as a change in the capacity of an individual to express Skill
(Sawyer, 2005). Typically, learning must be inferred from a relatively
permanent or stable increase in performance as a result of practice or
experience (Sawyer, 2005). In this context, a skill is an act or task
voluntarily undertaken with a goal or criterion to achieve. Henry (1968)
defined Motor Learning as sensorimotor skill acquisition. Bachman (1961)
suggested that Motor Learning is concerned with the precision, control,
and speed of movement, its coordination and effective timing that
together make up an effective skill. Sawyer (2005) suggests that
learning is learning, meaning that cognitive and motor learning should
not be viewed as dichotomous, but rather on a continuum, as most skills
have both cognitive and motor components. For example, playing a piano
takes both cognitive skills to read the music sheet and motor skills to
tap the keys. Moreover, the process that occurs which allows for both
cognitive and motor learning are similar in nature.
Figure 1.
Motor and
Cognitive Learning
Figure 1
graphically depicts that motor and cognitive learning should be viewed
on a continuum.
To elaborate on
these definitions, a skill would be typing, shooting a basketball or
bench pressing—no matter how proficiently the learner can express these
skills, they are all still skills. The level at which the learner can
express a skill would be their capacity. As discussed in the previous
articles of this historical series by Wilson and Wilson (2005)
terms such as ‘strength’ and ‘power’ are fallacious. Sawyer (2005)
suggests that these should be replaced with the term ‘capacity.’
Therefore,
rather than stating that someone has "mad skills," it should be stated
that someone has "a high capacity to express a specific skill or set of
skills."
It is important to
understand that learning must be inferred, meaning that learning is a
hypothetical construct, which is a way to describe something that is not
visibly observable. Further, learning must be inferred from a relatively
permanent or stable increase in performance. It is now important to
distinguish between performance and learning.
Wilson (2005)
performed a comprehensive analysis on performance. It was found that
Hull (1943) suggested an equation, which could make reliable predictions
on performance. Hull defined performance as the ‘reaction potential (sEr)’
of an organism, which is the probability and speed with which a behavior
occurred to a given stimulus.
He suggested that
performance was determined by seven components that were variable in
nature, with the exception of one, which he referred to as "habit
strength (sHr)," or learning.
An example of a variable component in his equation is known as
stimulus dynamism (V), which refers to the
clarity of the stimulus. Thus, the clearer the stimulus is,
the greater the probability of the response. For example, the
probability of staying within the lines of the road when driving at
night would be higher with your headlights on, as the lines could be
seen clearer. For more information on Hull’s equation, refer to,
Hull’s Quantitative Equation on Human Performance.
The learning paradigm is used to infer that learning has taken place and
is comprised of acquisition and retention trials. Acquisition refers to
initial practice conditions. Retention refers to trials performed after
a period of rest to assess learning. For example, if a student takes a
final, and then is tested 3 months later on the same material, the
student most likely would not do as well. Since learning is considered a
relatively permanent or stable increase in performance, some of the
material must therefore not have been learned. However, the information
that was retained was stable, and therefore inferred to be learned.
Figure 2.
The Learning
Paradigm
Figure 2
graphically depicts the learning paradigm. The trials performed can
represent any skill, such as bench pressing. The finishing points of
each graph were relatively temporary in nature. However, note that at
the beginning of day two, performance was greater than at the beginning
of day one. Further, at the beginning of day three, performance was
greater than at the beginning of day two, suggesting that learning had
occurred. Also, note that at the beginning of day two, performance
was less than at the end of day two. And that at the beginning of day
three, performance was less than at the beginning of day 2, suggesting
that some of elements of performance seen were temporary, and not
learned. This graph clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of the learning
paradigm to tease out the temporary nature of performance from the
relatively permanent nature of learning.
The learning
paradigm will be discussed and elaborated on continually throughout this
series.
Lastly, learning
is a result of practice or experience. The purpose of the following papers was to review practice variables which affect performance and
learning.
Conditions of
Practice
Wilson
and Wilson (2005) have previously established that the most
important practice variable in terms of sensory motor skill acquisition
is practicing the criterion task itself. However, it is
imperative that the reader understand that there is much more to skill
acquisition than endless repetitions. Indeed, there are multitudes of
ways to manipulate the effectiveness of practice. The following papers
will therefore analyze four conditions of practice as follows:
-
Mass vs.
Distributed Practice
-
Blocked vs.
Random Practice
-
Part vs. Whole
Practice
-
Programmed
Variations
These conditions of
practice are covered in part eight and
nine of the specificity series.
Jacob Wilson
President ABCbodybuilding / The Journal of HYPERplasia Research
jwilson@abcbodybuilding.com
Gabriel “Venom” Wilson
Vice President of ABCbodybuilding.com
Venom@abcbodybuilding.com
References and Sources Cited
Bachman, J.C.
(1961). Specificity vs. Generality in Learning and Performance Two Large
Muscle motor Tasks. Research Quarterly, 32, 3-11.
Henry, F, M.
(1968). Specificity vs. Generality in Learning Motor Skill. In R.C Brown
& G.S., Kenyon (EDS.), Classical Studies on Physical Activity. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hull, C.L. (1943).
Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Sawyer, D. (2005). SensoriMotor Skill Acquisition Lecture. California
State University Hayward.
Wilson (2005).
Hull’s Quantitative Equation on Human Performance. Journal of
HYPERplasia Research. ABCbodybuilding.com
© ABC Bodybuilding Company. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer |
