ABCbodybuilding - View Single Post - Scientific Discussion of the Week--The art of coaching: feedback, modelling and skill failure
View Single Post
  #9  
Old 11-10-2005, 10:58 AM
President Wilson's Avatar
President Wilson President Wilson is offline
President Wilson is hard at work
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: California
Posts: 11,582
Default Re: Scientific Discussion of the Week--The art of coaching: feedback, modelling and skill failure

[ QUOTE ]
e.g. if we video taped a sprinters running action and watched it back with his coach highlighting technical issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is critical, especially the part about providing cues for the athlete. Kernoodle and Carlton (1992) had participants either watch a video or watch a video with cues on specific aspects to look for, and found that the video with cues was far greater for learning. This is because a straight up video appears to have too great an information load to process

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion the same would hold true for knowledge of performance (KP).

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. A recent study found the same results in KP for a golf shot

[ QUOTE ]
If we videotaped every lift an athlete performs in a clean and jerk session and had them watch each lift immediately upon completion pointing out flaws and suggesting improvements the lifters would become dependent on the feedback and fail to process the information required to learn the task.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. It may also degrade learning because the modeling between each set will mainatin the current action plan in working memory. The action plan would consist of the motor program and the paramaters selected.

It is suggested that an individual will enhance learning if they have to initiate an action plan before each trial. This would be why random practice works so well, it causes a participant to abandon their action plan and recontruct a new one on each trial.

[ QUOTE ]
The more active environment invariable creates a better learning environment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen! Gabriel and I are submitting a paper on this concept as a paradigmn for success for kinesiology students. William James (1890) suggested that A curious peculiarity of our memory is that things are impressed better by active than by passive repetition (p. 686).

Evidence since then has only enhanced this statement

I have some other theories as well for constant KR.

1. The maladaptive correction Hypothesis - if KR is given on each trial, it may be given at a time in which the KR provides information about an error that is too small for the participants motor system to be able to correct for. They then attempt to make the correction anyway, and end out causing another error.

2. Enhanced variability - The aquisition of skill appears to be
a factor of

A. Gaining adaptability - here adjustment of the pattern is important

B. Stabilization of the pattern. - Each time KR is delivered the participant may make an adjustment, this while necessary enhances variability and makes it more difficult to stabilize a movement pattern. So reduced relative frequency can serve as a method to stabilize the pattern (i.e. they make less corrections).
__________________
Dr. Jacob Wilson, Ph.D, CSCS
President Abcbodybuilding.com
Professor of Exercise Science, University of Tampa Bay

About me --> http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/presidentprofile.html
Reply With Quote