The effect of constant practice in transfer tests

Abstract

-Background:There is a consensus that repetition observed in constant practice produces minimal benefits to the transfer of learning. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate in 3 experiments the effects of constant practice in transfer contexts. Methodology: Participants were asked during acquisition phase, in all experiments, to press four keys sequentially with different requirements of absolute timing in a same relative timing structure. In the transfer tests, they were tested in a novel absolute timing criterion. Results: The results of experiment 1 and 2 showed that the relative timing structure was maintained only when the transfer required parameter scaling close to the parameter value practiced in acquisition. The transfer parameter that is far to the parameter practiced did not affect the movement parameterization. The result of experiment 3 showed that relative timing structure is disrupted in the transfer test when constant practice has high and low amount of practice. Conclusion: Some specific aspects interfere in the transfer test when constant practice is experienced.

Mini-Review: practice organization beyond memory processes

“…This proposition was based on behavioral findings, which indicated that constant practice benefits learning of the relative timing of the movement, and random practice benefits the learning of the absolute timing. 4,25,26 The results found by Bicalho et al 18 confirmed partially the hypothesis. As expected, random practice showed a higher amount of KR and goal information gathered from the absolute dimension than constant practice.…”

“…Practices that are more variable lead to better learning than more repetitive practices. While variable practices result in more effective motor learning than constant practice, 4 random and serial variable practices are more effective than the blocked variable practice. 5,6 A point of convergence in all proposed behavioral hypotheses is that more variable practices demand more from mnemonic processes than more repetitive practices, being this feature responsible for the better learning observed in random and serial practices when compared with constant and blocked practices.…”

The Contextual Interference Effect in the Learning of a Manual Aiming Task

“…Peak velocity is a measure associated with the central control phase, that is, the preprogrammed phase of the action 9 . Random practice requires the reconstruction of the action plan with each new practice trial 20,21 . Bearing in mind that one of the task's goals is velocity, it is possible that this is the main parameter to be programmed during the trials.…”

Self-Controlled Feedback and Learner Impulsivity in Sequential Motor Learning

“…The sample size was defined considering studies that used motor tasks similar to the one used in this study (Apolina´rio-Souza et al, 2016;Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002;Kaefer, Chiviacowsky, Meira, & Tani, 2014;Lage et al, 2007Lage et al, , 2017Meira, Fairbrother, & Perez, 2015). The mean sample size used in these studies was 12.5 participants.…”

“…The same dynamic strategy might be expected when a motor task requires learning more than one spatial or temporal goal. For example, sequential tasks can require both the learning of relative times between movement components (movement pattern) and the parallel learning of an absolute time (movement parameterization), characterized by the sum of each component time (Apolinário-Souza et al., 2016; Lage et al., 2017; Lai, Shea, Wulf, & Wright, 2000; Lelis-Torres, Ugrinowitsch, Apolinario-Souza, Benda, & Lage, 2017; Shea, Lai, Wright, Immink, & Black, 2001). In this type of motor task, the use of a dynamic information processing strategy is essential to learning.…”