Volume 14, Issue 27 (8-2024)
JRSM 2024, 14(27): 1-18 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Fazeli Kasrineh D, Taheri H, Saberi Kakhki A. Effect Of Variable Practice In Physical Execution And Action Observation On Learning Golf Putting. JRSM 2024; 14 (27) :1-18
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3133-en.html
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3133-en.html
1- Assistant professor of Shiraz University. , d.fazeli@shirazu.ac.ir
2- Professor of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3- Associate Professor of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2- Professor of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3- Associate Professor of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
Abstract: (3773 Views)
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of practice variability in physical compared with observational practice on golf putting performance. To this end, 50 male right-handed students (25±3.7 years) participated in this study. Participants were randomly divided into 5 groups (physical constant, physical variable, observational constant, observational variable, and control). During acquisition, the physical variable group randomly performed 50 trials from 5 different starting points to 2 different targets, but the physical constant group performed 50 trials from one starting point to one predetermined target. The observational variable and constant groups observed the performance of the physical variable and constant groups, respectively. The control group just participated in pre-and post-tests. Participants performed a test just like the pre-test 10 minutes and also 24 hours after practice. Putting accuracy was measured as the dependent measure. Results showed that variability of practice had a positive effect on performance than constant practice in physical and observational conditions. Maybe the similar underlying mechanisms and also the similar feedback effects resulted in the higher performance of the variable group than the constant group in physical performance and action observation.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
motor behavior
Received: 2023/06/15 | Accepted: 2024/02/14 | ePublished ahead of print: 2024/02/14 | Published: 2024/08/31
Received: 2023/06/15 | Accepted: 2024/02/14 | ePublished ahead of print: 2024/02/14 | Published: 2024/08/31
References
1. Schmidt RA. A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological review. 1975;82(4):225. DOI: 10.1037/h0076770 [DOI:10.1037/h0076770]
2. Magill RA, Hall KG. A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human movement science. 1990;9(3):241-89. DOI: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90005-X [DOI:10.1016/0167-9457(90)90005-X]
3. Adams JA. A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of motor behavior. 1971;3(2):111-50. DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1971.10734898 [DOI:10.1080/00222895.1971.10734898]
4. Van Rossum JH. Schmidt's schema theory: The empirical base of the variability of practice hypothesis: A critical analysis. Human Movement Science. 1990;9(3):387-435. DOI: 10.1016/0167-9457(90)90010-B [DOI:10.1016/0167-9457(90)90010-B]
5. Wulf G, Schmidt RA. Variability of practice and implicit motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1997;23(4):987. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.23.4.987 [DOI:10.1037/0278-7393.23.4.987]
6. Williams AM, Davids K, Williams JGP. Visual perception and action in sport: Taylor & Francis; 1999.
7. Grosjean M, Shiffrar M, Knoblich Gn. Fitts's law holds for action perception. Psychological Science. 2007;18(2):95-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.0185 [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01854.x]
8. Hommel B. Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychological Research PRPF. 2009;73(4):512-26. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-009-0234-2 [DOI:10.1007/s00426-009-0234-2]
9. Jeannerod M. Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage. 2001;14(1):S103-S9. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0832 [DOI:10.1006/nimg.2001.0832]
10. Gatti R, Tettamanti A, Gough PM, Riboldi E, Marinoni L, Buccino G. Action observation versus motor imagery in learning a complex motor task: a short review of literature and a kinematics study. Neuroscience letters. 2013 Apr 12;540:37-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2012.11.039 [DOI:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.11.039]
11. Wong L, Manson GA, Tremblay L, Welsh TN. On the relationship between the execution, perception, and imagination of action. Behavioural brain research. 2013 Nov 15;257:242-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.09.045 [DOI:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.09.045]
12. Prinz W. An Ideomotor Approach to Imitation. Perspectives on imitation: Mechanisms of imitation and imitation in animals. 2005;1:141.
13. Shin YK, Proctor RW, Capaldi EJ. A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychological bulletin. 2010 Nov;136(6):943. DOI: 10.1037/a0020541 [DOI:10.1037/a0020541]
14. Wolpert DM, Flanagan JR. Motor prediction. Current biology. 2001;11(18):R729-R32. DOI: 10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8 [DOI:10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00432-8]
15. Debarnot U, Abichou K, Kalenzaga S, Sperduti M, Piolino P. Variable motor imagery training induces sleep memory consolidation and transfer improvements. Neurobiology of learning and memory. 2015 Mar 1;119:85-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2014.12.010 [DOI:10.1016/j.nlm.2014.12.010]
16. Ste-Marie DM, Law B, Rymal AM, Jenny O, Hall C, McCullagh P. Observation interventions for motor skill learning and performance: an applied model for the use of observation. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2012 Sep 1;5(2):145-76. DOI: 10.1080/1750984X.2012.665076 [DOI:10.1080/1750984X.2012.665076]
17. Kelly SW, Burton A, Riedel B, Lynch E. Sequence learning by action and observation: Evidence for separate mechanisms. British Journal of Psychology. 2003;94(3):355-72. DOI: 10.1348/000712603767876271 [DOI:10.1348/000712603767876271]
18. Trempe M, Sabourin M, Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. Observation learning versus physical practice leads to different consolidation outcomes in a movement timing task. Experimental brain research. 2011 Mar 1;209(2):181-92. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2540-3 [DOI:10.1007/s00221-011-2540-3]
19. Lim SB, Larssen BC, Hodges NJ. Manipulating visual-motor experience to probe for observation-induced after-effects in adaptation learning. Experimental brain research. 2014 Mar 1;232(3):789-802. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-013-3788-6 [DOI:10.1007/s00221-013-3788-6]
20. Ong NT, Larssen BC, Hodges NJ. In the absence of physical practice, observation and imagery do not result in updating of internal models for aiming. Experimental brain research. 2012 Apr 1;218(1):9-19. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2996-1 [DOI:10.1007/s00221-011-2996-1]
21. Bird AM, Rikli R. Observational learning and practice variability. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1983 Mar 1;54(1):1-4. DOI: 10.1080/02701367.1983.10605264 [DOI:10.1080/02701367.1983.10605264]
22. Kim T, Frank C, Schack T. A systematic investigation of the effect of action observation training and motor imagery training on the development of mental representation structure and skill performance. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 2017 Oct 17;11:499. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00499 [DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2017.00499]
23. Frank C, Kim T, Schack T. Observational practice promotes action-related order formation in long-term memory: Investigating action observation and the development of cognitive representation in complex motor action. Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2018 Jun 1;6(1):53-72. DOI: 10.1123/jmld.2017-0007 [DOI:10.1123/jmld.2017-0007]
24. Fazeli D, Rostami R, Nazemzadegan GhH. Effect of imagery and action observation on mental representation and movement accuracy of basketball free throw. Sport Psychology Studies.(Forthcoming 2022) (in Persian). DOI: 10.22089/spsyj.2021.9948.2091
25. Fazeli D, Moradi N. The Effect of Different Methods of Practice a Pre-Performance Routine on Mental Representation and Performance Levels of Volleyball Overhand Float-Serve. Sport psychology Studies. Fall 2019; 8(29): 87-104. (In Persian). DOI: 10.22089/spsyj.2019.7153.1762
26. Hayes SJ, Elliott D, Andrew M, Roberts JW, Bennett SJ. Dissociable contributions of motor-execution and action-observation to intramanual transfer. Experimental brain research. 2012 Sep 1;221(4):459-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2011.11.045 [DOI:10.1016/j.neulet.2011.11.045]
27. Coelho CJ, Nusbaum HC, Rosenbaum DA, Fenn KM. Imagined actions aren't just weak actions: Task variability promotes skill learning in physical practice but not in mental practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2012 Nov;38(6):1759. DOI: 10.1037/a0028065 [DOI:10.1037/a0028065]
28. Schmidt RA, Lee T. Motor control and learning: Human kinetics; 1988.
29. Black CB, Wright DL. Can observational practice facilitate error recognition and movement production? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2000;71(4):331-9. DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2000.10608916 [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2000.10608916]
30. Black CB, Wright DL, Magnuson CE, Brueckner S. Learning to detect error in movement timing using physical and observational practice. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2005;76(1):28-41. DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2005.10599259 [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2005.10599259]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
