Descriptive <i>versus</i> prescriptive feedback in the learning of golf putting by older persons

Nunes, Marcelo Eduardo de Souza; Corrêa, Umberto César; Souza, Marina Gusman Thomazi Xavier de; Santos, Suely

doi:10.1080/1612197x.2020.1717579

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To encourage greater participation and improve motor skill performance, self-learning activities and peer interaction have been suggested (Østerlie & Mehus, 2020;Hsia et al, 2022). Additionally, analyzing practice videos has been found to enhance physical skill performance (Kok et al, 2020;Nunes et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2022).…”

Section: Motor Skill Learning Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, the use of visual feedback and video instruction also has its limitations. Nunes et al (2020) mentioned that students may not achieve optimal learning outcomes solely by reviewing their own practice videos. Instead, they require additional verbal guidance of support from teachers to enhance their learning.…”

Section: Visual Feedback Using Mobile Devices In Pementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of wearable technology on badminton learning performance: a multiple feedback WISER model in physical education

Lin

Hung

Chen

2023

Smart Learn. Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional physical education mainly relies on the instructor’s verbal explanations and physical demonstrations. However, learners might be confused about whether their movements and positions are correct. Moreover, a typical badminton class has approximately 50 students, creating a huge teaching load for an instructor. To reduce the instructor’s workload and improve learners’ badminton performance, a multiple feedback WISER model was designed for badminton classes. The model provides visual feedback, information feedback, and verbal guidance to learners. In this study, a quasi-experiment was designed and participants were divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group adopted the multiple feedback WISER model while the control group applied the conventional method. The teaching experiment lasted for 8 weeks with 46 participants in the experimental group and 50 participants in the control group, respectively. To measure the learning performance, a movement detection system using wearable technology was utilized. The results indicate that the experimental group, which used the multiple feedback WISER model, outperformed the control group, which used traditional teaching methods, on badminton clear and smash skill learning (Clear: p < .001, EG = 71.03, CG = 54.76; Smash: p < .01, EG = 82.79, CG = 72.22). Further analysis reveals that the multiple feedback is more beneficial for learners with lower initial skill levels (Clear: p < .05, Lower = 63.21, Higher = 46.99; Smash: p < .001, Lower = 77.67, Higher = 39.39)

show abstract

Section: Motor Skill Learning Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Visual Feedback Using Mobile Devices In Pementioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of wearable technology on badminton learning performance: a multiple feedback WISER model in physical education

Lin

Hung

Chen

2023

Smart Learn. Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the existing motor learning protocols (e.g. 16 ), this task was used because it allowed accessing its hierarchical structure from identification of its interacting components 11 , namely: (1) backswing (from the beginning of the movement near the ball up to the highest point reached by the club); (2) forward swing (from the endpoint of the backswing to the contact to on the ball); (3) post-hitting swing (from the impact on the ball to the end of the club movement) (Figure 1A). Special issue: The role of practice in motor learning A putting golf club (TourEdge belly putter 0), which had attached to the top of the clubhead, near the face (impact) side, a bright orange non-reflective styrofoam marker for tracking its displacement, and standard golf balls were used by the participants to complete the task.…”

Section: Task and Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After that, they received instructions about how to perform the task as well as the trials number and intervals between trials. In addition, they were instructed to perform the task with a single motion by moving the club without any preparatory movement 16 Special issue: The role of practice in motor learning positioning of the ball; positioning the feet parallel with the ball in the center; the position of the arms with the left hand holding the upper part of the club with the thumb pointing downwards and the right hand below the left hand, with the thumb also pointing downwards, forming a triangle with the shoulders, arms and wrists; fists should not move; the look should be directed for the ball. Moreover, there was a kinesthetic instruction in which the experimenter held the participant's wrist making it clear that he/she should not move it and that the whole movement (club and arms) should work like a pendulum.…”

Section: Design and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights on the practice schedule role on performance under a hierarchical system view

Corrêa¹,

Okada

Ugrinowitsch

et al. 2022

BJMB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: A theoretical background of hierarchical open systems has emerged as an alternative for explaining consistency and adaptability as complementary in the same motor skill related-structure at different levels of analysis. AIM: Based on original supporting evidence, this paper presents and discusses how an adoption of such background allows theoretical and methodological insights on the role of practice schedule on performance. METHOD: Sixteen unexperienced individuals of both sexes performed 240 trials of the golf putting task over three days. They were randomly divided into four experimental groups: CO3 (performed trials at a distance of 3.0 m from the target); CO3i (performed all trials at a distance of 3.0 m from the target with a 9º incline on the last meter of the mini-golf putting); CO4 (performed all trials at a distance of 4.0 m from the target); and, VAR (performed all trials under these conditions in a counterbalanced order). RESULTS: All groups improved the performances related to the task goal, but in a different way by considering the frequencies of golf putting in different performance zones. Results also showed that the constant groups (CO3, CO3i and CO4) modified the macrostructures in different dimensions over practice, while VAR group only altered the microstructure. CONCLUSION: The distinct effects of the practice schedules on motor skill structure formation were only inferred because of adopting the hierarchical system view. Based on this background, it was possible to speculate that each practice schedule drives differently the formation of a motor control structure.

show abstract

“…Prescriptive feedback is considered to be beneficial to novice performers. 15,16 However, an overly prescriptive approach may not be beneficial to elite athletes, who may have already developed the skills necessary to self-regulate performance. 13 In a live competition setting, coaches of an elite Australian Rules football team provided 81% prescriptive feedback, with 19% considered descriptive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploratory investigation into the reception of verbal and video feedback provided to players in an Australian Football League club

Mason

Farrow

Hattie

2020

International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coach observation studies commonly examine training and competition environments, with little attention paid to the ways in which coaches provide video feedback in a performance analysis setting. In addition, few studies have considered the reception of feedback by an athlete, or the characteristics of the athlete that may support or hinder feedback reception. The purposes of this study were threefold. First, to examine the characteristics of feedback provided by a coach during a typical video feedback meeting. Second, to measure the impact of this feedback on athlete learning. Third, to consider a range of learner characteristics that may impact feedback reception. Six coaches and six players affiliated with an Australian Football League (AFL) club were recruited. Coach-player dyads were observed in one-to-one video feedback meetings following a game played in the 2017 season. Players were interviewed to test feedback recall. Players also completed a series of tests designed to measure learner characteristics, with the intention of discovering moderating factors of the relationship between feedback and learning outcomes. Rates of feedback generally mirrored those found in previous studies. Coaches provided nearly 30 feedback messages during each meeting. Players recalled 50% of summarised feedback messages but just 6% of all feedback a week later. A ceiling effect on learner characteristics was observed. The paper presents a novel design for examining feedback effectiveness while considering learner characteristics. Given the findings on feedback quantity and recall, coaches are encouraged to adopt a ‘less is more’ approach to providing feedback.

show abstract

Descriptive versus prescriptive feedback in the learning of golf putting by older persons

Cited by 6 publications

References 55 publications

The effect of wearable technology on badminton learning performance: a multiple feedback WISER model in physical education

The effect of wearable technology on badminton learning performance: a multiple feedback WISER model in physical education

Insights on the practice schedule role on performance under a hierarchical system view

An exploratory investigation into the reception of verbal and video feedback provided to players in an Australian Football League club

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About