The Effects on Skill Acquisition of an Interpolated Motor Short-Term Memory Task During The Kr-Delay Interval

Shea, John B.; Upton, Gary

doi:10.1080/00222895.1976.10735082

Cited by 22 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two factors differentiate the Shea and Upton (1976) and Marteniuk (1981) studies from the earlier work. First, the main task to be learned in each case was quite complex, being actually two separate positions in Shea and Upton's study and a four-segment pattern in Marteniuk's study.…”

Section: Kr-delay Intervalmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Another factor, as pointed out by Marteniuk, is the feature that the subjects had to learn the interpolated tasks, and providing KR on these tasks as well as the main task seemed to produce marked decrements in performance on the latter. Perhaps the interpolated activities interfered with the memory of Shea & Upton, 1976. ) the movement to be learned, providing a poorer basis for planning the next movement, thereby depressing performance.…”

Section: Kr-delay Intervalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.

Salmoni¹,

Schmidt²,

Walter³

1984

Psychological Bulletin

1,189

807

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous analyses of knowledge of results (KR) and motor learning have generally confounded the transient performance effects as shown when KR is present and the relatively permanent (i.e., learned) effects that we argue should be evaluated on a transfer test without KR. In this review, we classify investigations according to this distinction, and a number of new relations emerge between KR and both learning and performance. In addition to the motivational and associational roles of KR, we emphasize that it also acts as guidance, enhancing performance when it is present but degrading learning if it is given too frequently.

show abstract

Section: Kr-delay Intervalmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Kr-delay Intervalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.

Salmoni¹,

Schmidt²,

Walter³

1984

Psychological Bulletin

1,189

807

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include the (a) *ength cf time passing between a response and receipt of KR, i.e., KR-delay, (b) amount of time passing between KR and the next response, i.e., post-KR delay (see Figure 8 for the relationship between KR-Delay and post-KR-Delay intervals), (c) precision of KR, (d) frequency of KR, and (e) when KR is withdrawn during training. Slower learning occurs only when KR is delayed beyond perfomance of the next trial or response (Becker, Mussina, & Per.ons, 1963;Lavery, 1964;Lorge & Thorndike, 1935;Shea A Upton, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Training Procedures for Enhancing Reserve Component Learning, Retention, and Transfer

Wells¹,

Hagman²

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some studies focus on the interval between the movement and the delayed extrinsic feedback [15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. This interval may be spent simply without performing any specific activity or with a special activity such as counting [19].…”

Section: I Ranian R Ehabilitation Journalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Knowledge of Result Feedback Timing on Speech Motor Learning in Healthy Adults

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study mainly aimed at studying the effect of Knowledge of Result (KR) feedback timing and result-estimation opportunity before receiving delayed KR on learning a new speech motor skill in monolingual healthy adults. Methods: Thirty-nine Persian healthy adults were randomly divided into three groups. Each group received immediate KR, delayed KR (after eight seconds), or delayed KR (after eight seconds) with self-estimation of the result in the delay interval. All three groups received verbal KR feedback. Participants were trained to produce a French phoneme (/ɪn/) in the context of words in four training sessions. The correct production of the target phoneme was judged by a bilingual Persian-French examiner holding an academic degree in French language teaching. Later, a transfer test and two retention tests were administered. The two retention tests were administered one day and two weeks after the last training session respectively. Results: The effect of feedback timing on motor performance and motor learning was examined by repeated-measures ANOVA. Performance in both acquisition and retention phases was significantly different between groups (P=0.04 for both phases). One-way ANOVA was used to investigate the transfer of learning (P=0.001). Tukey test results indicated that the groups 1 and 2 were different in both acquisition and retention phases and all three groups were different in transfer test. Discussion: The results showed that the immediate KR is beneficial for the acquisition phase, and delayed KR is more beneficial for the retention and transfer tests compared with immediate KR.

show abstract

The Effects on Skill Acquisition of an Interpolated Motor Short-Term Memory Task During The Kr-Delay Interval

Cited by 22 publications

References 5 publications

Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.

Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal.

Training Procedures for Enhancing Reserve Component Learning, Retention, and Transfer

The Effect of Knowledge of Result Feedback Timing on Speech Motor Learning in Healthy Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About