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

Abstract

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.

Editorial: The Role of Practice in Motor Skill Acquisition: New Issues, the Same Question

“…Luz, Santos and Bonuzzi 14 , Ilha et al 13 , and Anderson and Steel 16 provided interesting directions on how to optimize the process of search to, first, approximate the solution found during practice to the "maximum" potential performance referred above and, second, how to maximize retention and transfer. In this vein, ideas from Correa et al 6 (see also Profeta and Ugrinowitsch 8 ) on hierarchical systems might provide the theoretical support to understand how (and why) the discussed practice aspects (e.g., attitude, difficulty, distribution, practice schedules) when manipulated can provide better gains in motor learning. despite the largely positive view (that I promoted) on the special issue, we are still understanding practice and its role for motor learning -as if we were in 1976, when Prof. Karl Newell made the starting statement of this editorial.…”

“…A second approach to my invitation was to postulate new views on the process of motor learning -which might solve the aforementioned issues and provide an answer to the role of practice. A first view was the hierarchical system's view to motor learning, discussed by Corrêa et al 6 . Under this view, motor learning relates to formation of an invariant macrostructure -directed to consistency and order -which constrains a variant and flexible microstructure.…”

“…The third approach -in line to the applications of Corrêa et al 6 and Profeta and Ugrinowitsch 8 -was to discuss important aspects of practice. That is, how practice can be manipulated to favor or hinder changes in the learner's movement possibilities.…”

“…Following the submitted papers to the current issue, those who dared to provide what is happening in this repeated performance (e.g., Correa et al6 and Anderson and Steel16 …”