Week 7.1 Flashcards
variable vs constant practice
constant = better in acquisition
variable = better for both retention and transfer
what type of skills would constant practice better for than variable practice?
- task you don’t want people to do (something you shouldn’t vary)
ex. landing a plant - don’t want to practice cause of inherent riskiness - when cost/risk of practice is too high
what happens if you are restricted in variable practice?
you perform constant practice
- typically more costly + risky though
high functional connectivity
high correlation between time spaces
- great degree of overlap and signals change in similar ways
low functional connectivity
not much overlap
functional connectivity
involves a timeseries correlation between BOLD signals (measures of oxygenated to de-oxygenated blood) in different regions in the brain
high correlation
interpreted at greater connectivity
low correlation
interpreted as lower connectivity
mcgregor and gribble 2017
participants with greater connectivity ( higher correlation), were better at observational learning
are participants with higher or lower connectivity better at observational learning
participants with higher connectivity
can we measure the rate of learning?
hard to quantify because of variables such as the criterion used to assess people and we have no measure of their potential for learning
blocked practice
practicing the same tasks repeatedly in a predictable manner
AAA BBB CCC
- predictable and repetitive
random practice
practicing multiple tasks in an unpredictable manner
CAB BCA ACB
- unpredictable and not repetitive
blocked vs random practice study
- they practiced 3 barrier knockdown task in blocked or random order
- performance was measured during acquisition, retention, and transfer
- groups were split in retention to be either blocked or random
blocked practice group in study
respond to the same stimulus repeatedly
random practice group study
stimuli were internalized
results of blocked vs random practice study
- blocked practice outperformed random practice in acquisition
- random practice outperformed blocked practice in both retention and transfer
- therefore random has biggest benefit for learning
where did the greatest deficit in learning come from in the blocked vs. random practice study
the greatest deficit in performance if practice blocked in acquisition then did random in retention
contextual interference (CI)
interference that is generated due to the context associated with skilled practice
- reduced performance in acquisition but produces an advantage in learning
- by randomizing the order in which tasks were performed you generate high CI
comparing constant and variable practice
- performance during ACQUISITION is better for CONSTANT practice
- performance during LEARNING is better for VARIABLE practice
comparing blocked and random practice
- performance during ACQUISITION is better for BLOCKED practice
- performance during LEARNING is better for RANDOM practice
psychology research (performance learning paradox)
variables that enhance performance were thought to be good for learning
NOT THE CASE
contextual interference - task influences
- knot tying tasks
- badminton
- tennis serving
- foreign language vocabulary
blocked practice and learning
rarely does blocked practice lead to more learning
- volleyball serves
the magnitude of CI
- effects may differ with age
- effects may depend on expertise
CI and effects differing with age
children don’t always show CI effects
CI and effects depending on expertise
even highly skilled learners can benefit from random practice
- random practice can be discouraging = making less effective
hall et al, 1994
examined the effect of blocked and random practice in NCAA athletes
- pitchers performed blocked and random practice and then were tested in both a blocked and random post-test
(15 fastballs, 15 curveballs, 15 changeups)
results of hall et al, 1994
- random practice facilitated transfer in both blocked and random tests
- even highly skilled athletes can benefit from random practice
elaborative processing hypothesis -CI
random practice promotes more comparative and contrastive analyses of actions required to complete the tasks
- preparatory and evaluative processes for each task are different
- representatives of actions are more memorable
studies looking at verbal reports
found that more reflection led to greater retention in blocked practice groups
forgetting and reconstructing hypothesis - CI
the processes associated with the reconstruction of the motor program are trained to a greater extent by random practice than blocked practice
process of forgetting and reconstruction hypothesis
- when you perform a task, you draw the motor program from long term memory
- an action plan is constructed and then it stays in working memory
- if the same program is used for the subsequent trial is stays in working memory
reconstructing the motor program
involves drawing it from long term memory again
- these are the processes tested in retention and transfer
cuddy and jacoby
forgetting to remember
- examined the recall and words in a list
- words are presented once or more times
- words presented more than once are presented either immediately, or in between intervening words
results of cuddle and jacoby
words repeated with lots of words in between are recalled more effectively than words repeated with no lags or short lags (SPACING EFFECT)
spacing
higher chance remembering words if 20 words spaced in between
CI - forgetting and reconstruction results
- any activity between trials that causes short-term forgetting should promote learning
- any activity that limits reconstruction should be detrimental to performance
lee et al, 1997 study description
- participant performed a sequential typing task
- participants performed blocked practice, random practice or random practice with a model
- examined practice with retention and transfer
what did the practice with a model do in lee et al, 1997
model gave information to aid reconstruction in working memory
- kinda a hint
lee et al, 1997 results
- greatest detriment of learning is random practice + model
- was as good as the other types of practice at first- but large error in R+T
- performing acquisition with a model diminished the effects of random practice
giving the learner hints to help performance
- extreme short-term benefit during acquisition
- similar to blocked practice at first - detrimental in the long-term
neural basis of CI
- default mode activation might change in older adults
- functional connectivity analysis could yield interesting findings
pauwels et al, 2018 study description
examined brain activation in response to blocked and random practice in young adults and older adults (examined the differences)
measuring activation in the default mode network
set of brain structures that exhibit a stable pattern of oscillations during resting state
oscillation patterns
change when involved in focused tasks
what does the default mode network contain?
- precuneus
- hippocampus
- prefrontal cortex
- posterior cingulate cortex
results of pauwels et al, 2018
- random practice led to better retention performance than blocked practice
- there was differential modulation of default mode network (DMN) activation as a function of practice
- for older adults - random practice resulted in larger decreases in DMN activation
why could it be that older adults had a larger decrease in DMN activation with random practice?
could be associated with more disperse, learning-related activity
serial practice
combines the predictableness of blocked practice with the non- repetitiveness of random practice
ABC-ABC-ABC (like a circuit)
serial practice effect
serial is not much different in retention than random, but better than blocked in retention
what does the serial practice result mean for interpreting the benefits of random practice?
non-repetativeness and predictableness = benefit
how could contextual interference explain the benefits of random practice?
- elaborative processing hypothesis
- forgetting and reconstructing hypothesis
