In many practical situations, learners are provided with feedback in the form of knowledge of results (KR) by a peer. However, when peers provide KR is currently unknown. When given the opportunity to request KR in a self-controlled manner, some participants have reported a preference for requesting KR after good performances. Alternatively, peers may provide KR in a different fashion. Subsequently, a discrepancy between the learner's desire to receive KR and when a peer provides KR may arise. In our study, peer- and self-controlled KR schedules were compared. Participants were peers who controlled KR (PC; 8), learners with peers (P-L; 8), or learners with self-control (SC; 8). Participants in the two learning groups (P-L and SC groups) completed a serial-timing task with a goal time of 2500 ms. Absolute error data on KR and no-KR trials along with self-reports indicate that participants with self-control preferred KR after good trials and peers preferred to provide KR after both good and bad trials equally. Results from the delayed retention test indicated that peer-controlled learners were more consistent (i.e., in terms of variable error) than the self-control group.
Introduction One of the most challenging aspects of Emergency Medicine (EM) residency is mastering the leadership skills required during a resuscitation. Use of resuscitation video recording for debriefing is gaining popularity in graduate medical education. However, there are limited studies of how video technology can be used to improve leadership skills in the emergency department. We aim to evaluate the utility of video-assisted self-reflection, compared with self-reflection alone, in the setting of resuscitation leadership. Methods This was a prospective, randomized, controlled pilot study conducted in 2018 at an urban level 1 trauma center with a three-year EM residency program. The trial included postgraduate year (PGY) 2 and 3 residents (n = 10). Each resident acted as an individual team leader for a live real-time resuscitation in the emergency department. The authors classified a patient as a resuscitation if there was an immediate life- or limb-threatening disease process or an abnormal vital sign with an indication of hypoperfusion. Each resident was recorded as the team leader twice. Both control and intervention groups produced written self-reflection after their first recording. The intervention group viewed their resuscitation recording while completing the written reflection. After their reflection, all participants were recorded for a second resuscitation. Two faculty experts, blinded to the study, scored each video using the Concise Assessment of Leader Management (CALM) scale to measure the leadership skills of the resident team leader. Results Five PGY‑3 and five PGY‑2 residents participated. The weighted kappa between the two experts was 0.45 (CI 0.34–0.56, p < 0.0001). The median gain score in the control group was −1.5 (IQR) versus 0.5 in the intervention group (IQR). Discussion Video-assisted self-reflection showed positive gain score trends in leadership evaluation for residents during a resuscitation compared with the non-video assisted control group. This tool would be beneficial to implement in EM residency.
The present experiment examined whether the method of subjectively appraising motor performance during skill acquisition would differentially strengthen performance appraisal capabilities and subsequent motor learning. Thirty-six participants (18 men and 18 women; M age = 20.8 years, SD = 1.0) learned to execute a serial key-pressing task at a particular overall movement time (2550 ms). Participants were randomly separated into three groups: the Generate group estimated their overall movement time then received knowledge of results of their actual movement time; the Choice group selected their perceived movement time from a list of three alternatives; the third group, the Control group, did not self-report their perceived movement time and received knowledge of results of their actual movement time on every trial. All groups practiced 90 acquisition trials and 30 no knowledge of results trials in a delayed retention test. Results from the delayed retention test showed that both methods of performance appraisal (Generate and Choice) facilitated superior motor performance and greater accuracy in assessing their actual motor performance compared with the control condition. Therefore, the processing required for accurate appraisal of performance was strengthened, independent of performance appraisal method.
Previous research has shown that peers without task experience provided knowledge of results (KR) as effectively as performers who self-controlled their own KR schedule (McRae et al., 2015). In the present experiment, a group of participants first practiced a motor task while self-controlling their KR during a defined acquisition period. Twenty-four hours after their last retention trial, these participants with motor experience then provided KR to a learner during their skill acquisition. Participants were required to learn a serial-timing task with a goal of 2,500 ms. Participants completed a defined acquisition period and then returned 24 h later for a retention test. In retention, learners who received KR from experienced peers were predicted to outperform learners who received KR from inexperienced peers. The results showed that performers learned the task similarly, independent of the peer’s previous task experience. However, the peer groups differed in their frequency of providing KR to the learner and showed a discrepancy between their self-reported KR provision strategy and when they actually provided KR. The results have theoretical implications for understanding the impact of self-control in motor learning contexts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.