Week 8.1 - KR Scheduling and Presentation Flashcards
two types of augmented feedback
- KR
- KP
why is summary KR better than trial by trial KR?
allows person to develop their own method of assessing performance (reference of correctness)
reference of correctness
used to calculate error based on sensory feedback
- developed by experience with movement and KR (perceptual trace)
adams 1971
proposed a 2-state theory of motor learning
adams 2-states from the 2-state theory of motor learning
- memory trace
- perceptual trace
memory trace
the recall of the motor program and the initiation of the response
- open loop part of the motor program
- response for action initiation
perceptual trace
generated by the memory trace once action is initiated and used for feedback evaluation
2 stages of motor learning
- verbal-motor stage
- motor-stage
***progress from verbal-motor stage to motor stage due to practice
verbal-motor stage
the stage of learning where one uses the perceptual trace in combination with KR for error detection and correction
motor stage
the error provided by KR is small, and there is a strengthened perceptual trace
(so accurate that augmented feedback does nothing)
forgetting
a weakening of the perceptual trace and memory trace
adams closed-loop theory
- memory trace (initiate action)
- movements
- perceptual trace
- feedback
- control centre (modifies memory trace)
**back up to memory trace
optimal summary length schmidt et al, 1989
longer summaries (15 trials) were better for overall learning than shorter summaries
optimal summary length schmidt et al, 1990
shorter summaries (5 trials) were better for learning than longer summaries (15 trials)
optimal summary length characteristics
may be task-specific and experience specific (gaudagnoli et al, 1996)
guadagnoli et al, 1996 - optimal summary length for simple tasks
longer summaries = better learning for novices
guadagnoli et al, 1996 - larger summaries
better for
1. novice performing simple tasks
2. experienced performing complex tasks
guadagnoli et al, 1996 - novices
- larger summaries are better than smaller ones for simple tasks
- smaller summaries are better than larger ones for complex tasks
guadagnoli et al, 1996 - experienced performers
larger summaries are better for complex and simple tasks
what is the impact of delaying trial by trial KR (immediate) on learning?
- when you delay KR the ITI (inter-trial interval) is also increased which is a potential compound
- also delays the start of the new trial (taking more time between trials)
thorndike (1935) findings
- larger delays decreased the likelihood that the reward stimulus would produce conditioning
-2. concluded that delays were detrimental to learning
salmoni et al, 1984 study description
reviewed human motor learning experiments
salmoni et al, 1984 findings
- delaying KR did not affect learning
- instantaneous KR did affect learning
KR-delaying interval
the learner is trying to remember KR
maslovat 2009 study description
- examined the role of discrete vs. continuous feedback on a circle drawing task
- tested participants performance in R+T tests
discrete feedback
feedback at movement endpoint
continuous feedback
feedback during the movement
maslovat et al, 2009 results
- continuous feedback enhanced performance but was detrimental to learning under new conditions (guidance hypothesis)
- participants who practiced with concurrent feedback did better in tests with concurrent feedback (specificity for practice hypothesis)
post-KR delay interval
the time between the presentation of KR and the next movement (where the learner is preparing the next movement)
- a time where the learner is more creative and is using KR effectively
shortening the post-KR delay
research suggests that reducing this period does not affect learning if the KR-delay is held constant
what time is most important for movement corrections?
the time between movement end and when KR appears
marteniuk, 1986 study description
investigated interference during the KR-delay period
marteniuk, 1986 results
high level processes (cognitive processes associated with learning) interfered with KR processing
interference in the KR-delay interval
impair the evaluation of the movement and seem to affect learninf
memory and requirement for KR processing
a retention of the movement information (at least in short-term memory) is required for KR processing
interference
reduces the capacity of memory systems to evaluate inherent feedback and detect errors
- clears task out of working memory
what happens if you ask participants to evaluate their own errors during the KR-delay interval
in practice people hate this
- “do you think you got this question right?”
hogan and yannowitz (1978) study description
used a ballistic timing task and some patients to estimate their own errors
1. group 1: estimated movement time (how close to goal)
2. group 2: nonsense letters
hogan and yannowitz (1978) results
group 1 who estimated movement time, performed better
gaugagnoli and kohl (2001)
compared learning in 4 conditions
1. 100% KR and 100% error estimate
2. 20% KR and 100% error estimate
3. 100% KR and 20% error estimate
4. 20% KR and 0% estimate
gaugagnoli and kohl (2001) results
- best performance when you estimate 100% of your KR
- worst performance if you estimate 0% with 100% KR
- performing prediction gets rid of detrimental effects of immediate feedback
subjective estimation
- helps participants learn to use inherent feedback with KR
- may prevent guidance effects
- strong practical application (we give learners precise feedback and they do not develop this error detection capabiltiy)
how could we use subjective estimation in practical/learning settings?
- give individual opportunity to assess their performance
- get rid of some detriment with 100% KR
constant corrections
can affect a learner’s sense of autonomy and motivation
janelle at al (1997) study description
participants practiced throwing a ball with their non-dominant arm
1. one group received no KR
2. one group received KR (distance thrown)
3. one group received summary KP every 5th trial
4. one group received self-determined KP
janelle et al (1997) graph explaination
- self-determined performed just as well as those who received summary in retention
- those who received KR performed worst in retention
best forms of feedback for motivation
self-controlled feedback combined with best practices from KR literature
- increases motivation and form during acquisition
janelle et al (1997) results
suggest that self-controlled feedback improves both acquisition and retention
adams closed loop theory
explains why feedback is beneficial
1. KR strengthens perceptual trace
2. error is used to adjust trace associated with the correct movement
3. movements become less reliant on KR as the perceptual trace is strengthened
adams closed loop theory - bell curve
as you practice, the ability to produce the right movement increases (bell-curve narrows)
criticisms of adams closed loop theory
- does not account for how variable practice can strengthen the perceptual trace
- ignores the guidance hypothesis aspects of KR
strict schema theory
variable practice should weaken the perceptual trace and reduce learning
schema theory of motor learning
- built on adams theory and added an open loop component
- recall memory and recognition memory
- GMP is central to this theory
recall memory
movement production (component of the memory trace)
- more of a role in open-loop and rapid movements
recognition memory
movement evaluation (component of the perceptual trace)
- greater involvement in closed-loop control
recall schema
each movement produces an outcome which is evaluated with respect to the parameters
- recall schema stores these relationships in long-term memory
what happens when a new movement must be planned
the recall schema is used in parameterization
- sets the conditions that will best achieve the goal
recall schema relationships
concept of relationship between parameter and movement outcome
what does the recognition schema contain?
relationship between
1. initial conditions
2. environmental outcomes
3. sensory consequences
is the recognition schema used before or after the recall schema?
AFTER - to generate
recall and recognition schema
after the recall schema is used to generate the action, the recognition schema is used to generate the expected sensory consequences
(basis for movement evaluation)
schema theory and learning
learning occurs by strengthening the schemas
if augmented feedback is unavailable, what will happen to the recall schema?
unable to store the relationship between the parameters and outcomes
- therefore unable to program the movement
if the sensory consequences are missing, what will happen to the recognition schema
- unable to perform real time evaluation of the action
- unable to correct the action (not getting sensory feedback so recognition schema cannot evaluate)
what is learning based on?
establishing relationships
variable practice
more movement outcomes = better rule development
- better recognition schema
novel movements
a new movement can be generated based on rules established by similar movements (hockey vs. golf clubs)
error detection
errors for rapid movements can be detected based on the recognition schema
limitations of schema theory
- KR-frequency
- contextual interference
KR-frequency
reduced KR frequency can actually improve learning
contextual interference
- schema theory predicts that variable practice would be better
- does not explain why random practice could be better
where immediate feedback is available, how can we encourage learning?
ask the learner to estimate their own performance
error estimation
appears to facilitate the integration of KR information and promote learning
self-determined augmented feedback presentation
appears to promote both performance and learning
schema theory describes learning as the strengthening of what?
- recall schema
- recognition schema
