The effects of differential instructional sets on motor skill acquisition were investigated using performance outcome and kinematic measures. Participants were provided with a single analogical instruction (analogy learning), a set of eight explicit (technical) instructions (explicit learning), or were not instructed (control). During a learning phase, participants (n=9 for each condition) performed a modified basketball shooting task over 3 days (160 trials per day). On the fourth day, participants performed a test phase consisting of two 40-trial retention tests, separated by a 40-trial secondary task transfer test, and completed a verbal protocol describing in detail the techniques that they had used to perform the task. No performance differences were found during the two retention tests, indicating similar amounts of learning for all groups. During the transfer test, performance deteriorated for both the explicit and control conditions, but not for the analogy condition. Participants in the analogy condition reported significantly fewer technical rules. Although no group differences were reported for kinematic variables, identification of movement components supported the claim that explicit learners exert conscious control over their movements, whereas analogy learners use a more implicit (unconscious or automatic) mode of movement control.

The efficacy of analogical instruction, relative to explicit instruction, for the acquisition of a complex motor skill and subsequent performance under pressure was investigated using a modified (seated) basketball shooting task. Differences in attentional resource allocation associated with analogy and explicit learning were also examined using probe reaction times (PRT). Access to task-relevant explicit (declarative) knowledge was assessed. The analogy and explicit learning groups performed equally well during learning and delayed retention tests. The explicit group experienced a drop in performance during a pressured transfer test, relative to their performance during a preceding retention test. However, the analogy group's performance was unaffected by the pressure manipulation. Results from PRTs suggested that both groups allocated equal amounts of attentional resources to the task throughout learning and test trials. Analogy learners had significantly less access to rules about the mechanics of their movements, relative to explicit learners. The results are interpreted in the context of Eysenck and Calvo's (1992) processing efficiency theory and Masters's (1992) theory of reinvestment.

No abstract

The lunge is the most fundamental skill in badminton competitions. Fifteen university-level male badminton players performed lunge maneuvers in four directions, namely, right-forward, left-forward, right-backward, and left-backward, while wearing two different brands of badminton shoes. The test compared the kinetics of badminton shoes in performing typical lunge maneuvers. A force plate and an insole measurement system measured the ground reaction forces and plantar pressures. These measurements were compared across all lunge maneuvers. The left-forward lunge generated significantly higher first vertical impact force (2.34 ± 0.52 BW) than that of the right-backward (2.06 ± 0.60 BW) and left-backward lunges (1.78 ± 0.44 BW); higher second vertical impact force (2.44 ± 0.51 BW) than that of the left-backward lunge (2.07 ± 0.38 BW); and higher maximum anterior-posterior shear force (1.48 ± 0.36 BW) than that of the left-backward lunge (1.18 ± 0.38 BW). Compared with other lunge directions, the left-forward lunge showed higher mean maximum vertical impact anterior-posterior shear forces and their respective maximum loading rates, and the plantar pressure at the total foot and heel regions. Therefore, the left-forward lunge is a critical maneuver for badminton biomechanics and related footwear research because of the high loading magnitude generated during heel impact.