Motor learning, feedback and retention
| English | Español |
|---|---|
| knowledge of results/ˈnɒlɪdʒ ɒv rɪˈzʌlts/ | conocimiento de los resultados |
| retention/rɪˈtenʃn/ | retención |
What would explain this observation?
- A learner performs well while a coach gives constant instructions, then struggles the next day. Immediate performance and retained learning are different outcomes.
- Start with a prediction. State the quantities or features you would compare, then decide what evidence could distinguish two explanations.
Build the model
- Motor learning is a relatively lasting change in movement capability from practice. Knowledge of results 结果反馈 concerns the outcome; knowledge of performance concerns movement quality.
- retention 保持: Persistence of learning after a delay; knowledge of results: Feedback about the task outcome.
Which measure best tests lasting learning?
A retention test after a delay and without the same assistance can provide evidence of learning. Practice conditions, prior experience and task difficulty need control before comparing feedback methods.
Match each technical term to its precise meaning.
Use the definitions to distinguish related quantities and processes.
Choose evidence that can test it
- A retention test after a delay and without the same assistance can provide evidence of learning. Practice conditions, prior experience and task difficulty need control before comparing feedback methods.
- Use a low-risk target task, equal practice time, random or balanced assignment, and a delayed retention test. Record outcome accuracy separately from movement quality. Seek consent and avoid labels about a participant ability or personality.
Which two habits make the investigation or model in this case more defensible?
Use a low-risk target task, equal practice time, random or balanced assignment, and a delayed retention test. Record outcome accuracy separately from movement quality. Seek consent and avoid labels about a participant ability or personality.
Work from known quantities
- State the known values and their units. Choose the relation because its assumptions fit this case, then rearrange before substitution.
- Known: 12 of 20 throws hit a target during retention. Accuracy = successful attempts/total attempts ×100 = 12/20×100 = 60%. Another group at 70% is not automatically superior without sample variability and comparable starting performance.
15 of 25 retention attempts succeed. Find success percentage. Use the same sequence: known quantities → model → relation → substitution → unit and interpretation.
15 of 25 retention attempts succeed. Find success percentage.
The result is 60 %. Known: 12 of 20 throws hit a target during retention. Accuracy = successful attempts/total attempts ×100 = 12/20×100 = 60%. Another group at 70% is not automatically superior without sample variability and comparable starting performance.
Check the conclusion and its limits
- More feedback is not always better for independent performance. A short-term improvement alone does not demonstrate a lasting learning change.
- Return to the original observation. Explain what the result supports, which conditions it assumes, and one way to test a competing explanation.
High performance during guided practice always proves lasting motor learning. This claim is false: More feedback is not always better for independent performance. A short-term improvement alone does not demonstrate a lasting learning change.
Motor learning, feedback and retention: A retention test after a delay and without the same assistance can provide evidence of learning. Practice conditions, prior experience and task difficulty need control before comparing feedback methods.
High performance during guided practice always proves lasting motor learning.
More feedback is not always better for independent performance. A short-term improvement alone does not demonstrate a lasting learning change.
Persistence of learning after a delay: write the technical term.
retention means Persistence of learning after a delay.