The present experiment was designed to test the predictions of the constrained-action hypothesis. This hypothesis proposes that when performers utilize an internal focus of attention (focus on their movements) they may actually constrain or interfere with automatic control processes that would normally regulate the movement, whereas an external focus of attention (focus on the movement effect) allows the motor system to more naturally self-organize. To test this hypothesis, a dynamic balance task (stabilometer) was used with participants instructed to adopt either an internal or external focus of attention. Consistent with earlier experiments, the external focus group produced generally smaller balance errors than did the internal focus group and responded at a higher frequency indicating higher confluence between voluntary and reflexive mechanisms. In addition, probe reaction times (RTs) were taken as a measure of the attention demands required under the two attentional focus conditions. Consistent with the hypothesis, the external focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did the internal focus participants, indicating a higher degree of automaticity and less conscious interference in the control processes associated with the balance task.

We review researchrelated to the learning of complex motor skills with respect to principles developed on the basis of simple skill learning. Although some factors seem to have opposite effects on the learning of simple and of complex skills, other factors appear to be relevant mainly for the learning of more complex skills. We interpret these apparently contradictory findings as suggesting that situations with low processing demands benefit from practice conditions that increase the load and challenge the performer, whereas practice conditions that result in extremely high load should benefit from conditions that reduce the load to more manageable levels. The findings reviewed here call into question the generalizabilityof results from studies using simple laboratory tasks to the learning of complex motor skills. They also demonstrate the need to use more complex skills in motor-learning research in order to gain further insights into the learning process. THEORETICAL AND REVIEW ARTICLES

OBJECTIVES Findings from the contemporary psychological and movement science literature that appear to have implications for medical training are reviewed. Specifically, the review focuses on four factors that have been shown to enhance the learning of motor skills: observational practice; the learner's focus of attention; feedback, and self-controlled practice.OBSERVATIONAL PRACTICE Observation of others, particularly when it is combined with physical practice, can make important contributions to learning. This includes dyad practice (i.e. practice in pairs), which is not only cost-effective, but can also enhance learning. FOCUS OF ATTENTIONStudies examining the role of the performer's focus of attention have consistently demonstrated that instructions inducing an external focus (directed at the movement effect) are more effective than those promoting an internal focus (directed at the performer's body movements). An external focus facilitates automaticity in motor control and promotes movement efficiency.FEEDBACK Feedback not only has an informational function, but also has motivational properties that have an important influence on learning. For example, feedback after successful trials and social-comparative (normative) feedback indicating better than average performance have been shown to have a beneficial effect on learning.SELF-CONTROLLED PRACTICE Self-controlled practice, including feedback and model demonstrations controlled by the learner, has been found to be more effective than externally controlled practice conditions. CONCLUSIONS All factors reviewed in this article appear to have both informational and motivational influences on learning. The findings seem to reflect general learning principles and are assumed to have relatively broad applicability. Therefore, the consideration of these factors in designing procedures for medical training has the potential to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of training.motor skill learning

Previous studies (e.g.

This study examined individuad differences in the preference for and effectiveness of the type of attentional focus for motor learning. In two experiments, participants practicing a balance task (stabilometer) were asked to find out whether focusing on their feet (internal focus) or on two markets in front of their feet (external focus) was more effective. In Experiment 1, participants switched their attentional focus from trial to trial on Day 1 and used their preferred attentional focus on Day 2. In Experiment 2, participants were free to switch their attentional focus any time during 2 days of practice. Retention tests were performed on Day 3. Most participants chose an external focus. Also, they were more effective in retention than participants who preferred an internal focus.

No abstract

Behavioral research has produced many taskspecific cognitive models that do not say much about the underlying information-processing architecture. Such an architecture is badly needed to better understand how cognitive neuroscience can benefit from existing cognitive models. This problem is especially pertinent in the domain of sequential behavior where behavioral research suggests a diversity of cognitive processes, processing modes and representations. Inspired by decades of reaction time (RT) research with the Additive Factors Method, the Psychological Refractory Period paradigm, and the Discrete Sequence Production task, we propose the Cognitive framework for Sequential Motor Behavior (C-SMB). We argue that C-SMB accounts for cognitive models developed for a range of sequential motor tasks (like those proposed by Keele et al., Psychological Review, 110(2), 316-339, 2003; Rosenbaum et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(1), 86-102, 1983, Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 710-725, 1986, Psychological Review, 102, 28-67, 1995 Schmidt, Psychological Review, 82(4), 225-260, 1975;Sternberg et al., 1978, Phonetica, 45, 177-197, 1988. C-SMB postulates that sequence execution can be controlled by a central processor using central-symbolic representations, and also by a motor processor using sequencespecific motor representations. On the basis of this framework, we present a classification of the sequence execution strategies that helps researchers to better understand the cognitive and neural underpinnings of serial movement behavior.

In 2 experiments, the authors studied the effectiveness of physical and observational practice on learning and the effect on learning of combining physical practice and observation, as compared with providing physical practice alone. In Experiment 1, retention and transfer performance of 30 university students after physical, observational, or no practice were contrasted. Consistent with findings from other studies, the retention results indicated that observational practice is inferior to physical practice. The transfer data indicated no differences between observation and physical practice groups. In Experiment 2, retention and transfer performance of 30 participants in physical and combined (alternating physical and observational) practice groups were contrasted. The retention results showed no differences between the combined and physical practice groups, but the combined group performed significantly better than the physical practice group on the transfer test. Those findings suggest that a combination of observation and physical practice permits unique opportunities for learning beyond those available via either practice regimen alone.