This experiment was designed to investigate the effect of cognitive problem-solving operations (termed contextual interference) and complexity of tasks on the acquisition retention and transfer of motor skills. Ninety-six children, ages 7.5-9.5 practiced the task of throwing beanbags under either low contextual interference (blocked practice), high contextual interference (random practice) or medium contextual interference (combined practice). Half of the participants acquired a complex task and the other half a simple task. All participants performed 30 acquisition trials, 9 retention trials and 4 transfer trials. Results indicated that participants who practiced in the blocked practice group did not differ in their performance whether they acquired complex or simple tasks. On the other hand, participants from the random and combined practice groups who acquired simple tasks performed better than those who acquired complex tasks. These findings support the hypothesis that there is a limit to the interference during practice that will benefit retention and transfer, thus creating the contextual interference effect. It seems that the complex-task condition combined with random or combined practice schedule increased the difficulty of acquisition, possibly impeding the cognitive processing during acquisition, thus impairing the learning process.

This experiment was designed to investigate the effect of cognitive problem-solving operations (termed contextual interference) and complexity of tasks on the acquisition retention and transfer of motor skills. Ninety-six children, ages 7.5-9.5 practised the task of throwing beanbags under either low contextual interference (blocked practice), high contextual interference (random practice) or medium contextual interference (combined practice). Half of the participants acquired a complex task and the other half a simple task. All participants performed 30 acquisition trials, 9 retention trials and 4 transfer trials. Results indicated that participants who practised in the blocked practice group did not differ in their performance whether they acquired complex or simple tasks. On the other hand, participants from the random and combined practice groups who acquired simple tasks performed better than those who acquired complex tasks. These findings support the hypothesis that there is a limit to the interference during practice that will benefit retention and transfer, thus creating the contextual interference effect. It seems that the complex-task condition combined with random or combined practice schedule increased the difficulty of acquisition, possibly impeding the cognitive processing during acquisition, thus impairing the learning process.