The effects of pacing and distribution on intercorrelations of motor abilities.

Rd, Nance

doi:10.1037/h0060705

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a later experiment (181), the breakdown in the correlation pattern with introduction of a major rest is very nice, but rest does more than reduce IR. Nance's earlier study (156), in which he compared intertask correlations as affected by two variables, pacing and distribution, and, particularly, Kientzle's (124,125) two sets of data are quite opposed to an IR explanation of the pattern. Kientzle claimed essentially identical patterns and magnitudes of correlations with massed and distributed reversed-alphabet printing (124).…”

Section: Abilities Training and Tasks As Predictors Of Skillmentioning

confidence: 96%

Motor-Skills Learning

Bilodeau¹,

Bilodeau²

1961

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With everyone else, we think that task areas are largely a convenience, and it is thus not worth while to labor a definition of motor skills. Research in motor-skills learning is conducted for the same reason that any research is conducted. Learning is learning, regardless of Ss and apparatus, and we wish to make no point of motor-skills learning as opposed to verbal learning or conditioning. Nonetheless, we have tried to include only studies that are well within our crudely defined area of human motor-skills learning, how ever strong the temptation to follow a major variable through the �ingle unit T -maze and memory drum.Among the complex parts of human learning, we distinguish very roughly and with deliberate naivete as follows-motor skills: the hand holds and moves some physical apparatus, pencil and toggle-switch usually excepted, unless S cannot make the required movements at the start of practice ; ver bal learning: the task emphasizes words to be memorized; and perceptual learning: it is neither of the above and the senses are the most obvious ele ments of the task. A simpler way to say about the same thing is to distin guish areas according to the relative importance of the hand, tongue, and eye. Also implicit in motor-skills learning is the emphasis on learning to make R, rather than to select R on cue, an interpretation that has severely limited our review of push-button research.The danger of sorting research into convenient piles is that studies that land between piles may be overlooked. This is a problem not only in separat ing verbal from motor studies, but in separating human-factors engineering studies from skills learning. With both studying common performance (not learning) variables, the relationships between the two areas are too obvious to list; as a result, many fine pUblications at the interface will be neglected. An example is Krendel's (132) summary of performance experiments on man-powered devices. Spragg, Andreas, Green, Gerall, and many associates in the skills laboratory at Rochester have been steadily producing data on display-control relations and on the response properties of controls and di splays (21, 22, 23, 101 ). A long line of careful work by Smith (112,199, 1 This review covers the years 1945 through 1959. Previous reviews overlooked skills learning, so our expanded coverage cites critical articles from 1945-1955, but gives greatest emphasis to the years after 1955 as reference sources. The writers wish to acknowledge the financial contribution of the Graduate Council on Research of Tulane University and the support of the National Science Foundation.'The following abbreviations and symbols will be used: S (subject)'; E (ex perimenter) ; R (response) ; S-R (stimulus-response); KR (knowledge of results or feedback); In (reactive inhibition); sIn (conditioned inhibition). 243Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1961.12:243-280. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Access provided by New York University -Bobst Library on 02/04/15. For personal use only.Quick links to online content Further...

show abstract

Section: Abilities Training and Tasks As Predictors Of Skillmentioning

confidence: 96%

Motor-Skills Learning

Bilodeau¹,

Bilodeau²

1961

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, just as with IQ and the concept of in telligence, the concept of a general aptitude ("g") in motor ability has been questioned by theoretical developments the past two decades (Sporns & Edelman, 1993;Hadders-Algra, 2010). It is an old and common finding in research on individual differences in motor performance that the level of in terrelationships (correlations) between various motor tests can be relatively low (Bagley, 1901;Garfiel, 1923;Seashore, 1930;Buxton, 1938;Nance, 1948;Henry, 1961;Drowatsky & Zuccato, 1967;Husak & Magill, 1979;Haga, Ped ersen, & Sigmundsson, 2008). Individual differences (variations) in motor skills are therefore hypothesized to be task-specific, and the level of motor performance people attain is not associated with, or dependent upon, a ba sic motor ability (or motoric "g") that underlies performance across motor tasks (Haga, et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrelations between Three Fine Motor Skills in Young Adults

Lorås

Sigmundsson

2012

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motor skills are typically considered to be highly specific, although some researchers have attempted to identify evidence for general motor aptitude. The present study tested these contentions by assessing the extent of relationship between fine motor tasks, using correlations between selected performance measures for three fine motor skills. University students ages 18 to 35 years (N = 305; 147 men, 158 women) completed three fine motor tasks with both right and left hands (placing pegs, posting coins, and placing bricks). Performance was assessed by time to complete each individual task. The intercorrelations between the three tasks were generally low and at a level that can be expected by chance (r < or = .3), indicating that performance was quite specific to the individual skills rather than attributable to a general ability. As a further test for evidence for a general motor ability, the dimensionality of the data set was analyzed using a principal component analysis on the correlation matrix. A three-factor solution explaining approximately 80% of the total variance in performance on the fine motor tasks was identified, where each factor could be associated with each fine motor task. These findings provide further support for the high specificity in fine motor skills and against the existence of a general aptitude for motor ability.

show abstract

“…In this respect, Larkin and Parker (2002) argued that in "specifi c" training, every particular skill is considered specifi c and should be trained specifi cally. Evidence supporting the task-specifi city perspective of learning can be found in motor skills research, where correlations between various motor tests can be relatively low ( Bagley, 1901 ;Garfi eld, 1923 ;Seashore, 1930 ;Buxton, 1938 ;Seashore, Buxton, & McCollom, 1940 ;Nance, 1948 ;Henry, 1961 ;Drowotsky & Zuccato, 1967 ;Husak & Magill, 1979 ;Haga, et al, 2008 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Exploring Individual Differences in Children's Mathematical Skills: A Correlational and Dimensional Approach

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual differences in mathematical skills are typically explained by an innate capability to solve mathematical tasks. At the behavioural level this implies a consistent level of mathematical achievement that can be captured by strong relationships between tasks, as well as by a single statistical dimension that underlies performance on all mathematical tasks. To investigate this general assumption, the present study explored interrelations and dimensions of mathematical skills. For this purpose, 68 ten-year-old children from two schools were tested using nine mathematics tasks from the Basic Knowledge in Mathematics Test. Relatively low-to-moderate correlations between the mathematics tasks indicated most tasks shared less than 25% of their variance. There were four principal components, accounting for 70% of the variance in mathematical skill across tasks and participants. The high specificity in mathematical skills was discussed in relation to the principle of task specificity of learning.

show abstract

The effects of pacing and distribution on intercorrelations of motor abilities.

Cited by 16 publications

References 10 publications

Motor-Skills Learning

Motor-Skills Learning

Interrelations between Three Fine Motor Skills in Young Adults

Exploring Individual Differences in Children's Mathematical Skills: A Correlational and Dimensional Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About