Self-Controlled Learning: The Importance of Protecting Perceptions of Competence

Abstract

Recent studies examining the role of self-controlled feedback have shown that learners ask for feedback after what they believe was a “good” rather than “poor” trial. Also, trials on which participants request feedback are often more accurate than those without feedback. The present study examined whether manipulating participants’ perception of “good” performance would have differential effects on learning. All participants practiced a coincident-anticipation timing task with a self-controlled feedback schedule during practice. Specifically, they were able to ask for feedback after 3 trials in each of three 10-trial practice blocks. While one group (Self-30) was told that an error of 30 ms or less would be considered good performance, another group (Self-4) was informed that an error of 4 ms or less would be considered a good trial. A third, self-control group (Self) did not receive any information about what constituted good performance. The results showed that participants of all groups asked for feedback primarily after relatively good trials. At the end of practice, both the Self-30 and Self groups demonstrated greater perceived competence and self-efficacy than the Self-4 group. The Self-30 and Self groups also performed with greater accuracy and less variability in retention and transfer (non-dominant hand) 1 day later. The present findings indicated that the typical learning benefits of self-controlled practice can be thwarted by depriving learners of the opportunity of experiencing competence through good performance. They add to the accumulating evidence of motivational influences on motor learning.

Do we know what we need? Preference for feedback about accurate performances does not benefit sensorimotor learning.

“…when the decision to provide KR is made by an experimenter or coach, and not by the learner), which differs from what has been reported by recent studies investigating self-controlled KR (e.g. Chiviacowsky et al, 2012). Furthermore, the observed negative effect on performance, combined with the preference for receiving KR about accurate trials, corroborates previous findings showing that humans do not always choose optimal learning strategies when given control over their learning contexts (Huang et al, 2008).…”

“…In the former, KR about accurate performances would protect the learners' perceived competence, which would in turn lead to learning gains (e.g. Chiviacowsky et al, 2012). In the latter, KR about accurate performances could be used by learners to increase their confidence in response correctness, strengthening the association between planned and actual response (e.g.…”

Why self-controlled feedback enhances motor learning: Answers from electroencephalography and indices of motivation

“…Another reason self-control participants are hypothesized to be more intrinsically motivated is because they have higher perceived competence (Chiviacowsky, 2014), which has been positively associated with intrinsic motivation (Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2003;Vallerand, Gauvin, & Halliwell, 1986;Vallerand & Reid, 1984). They have higher perceived competence because they generally receive positive feedback (Chiviacowsky, Wulf, & Lewthwaite, 2012), as they tend to request feedback primarily after good trials (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002;Fairbrother et al, 2012). Yet, despite the rationale for why self-control participants should be more intrinsically motivated, empirical evidence is lacking (Sanli et al, 2013).…”

Effects of external focus of attention on learning static balance among girls with ADHD

“…Based on the OPTIMAL theory, practice conditions that facilitate motor performance and learning are (a) enhanced expectancies, (b) autonomy support and (c) external focus of attention. In this theory, enhanced expectancies and autonomy support are con sidered as motivational factors and have been well investigated by previous research [7,9,13,14]. In addition, external focus of attention is consid ered as an attentional factor, which optimizes performance and learning a new motor skill [24].…”