The implicit benefit of learning without errors

Abstract

Two studies examined whether the number of errors made in learning a motor skill, golf putting, differentially influences the adoption of a selective (explicit) or unselective (implicit) learning mode. Errorful learners were expected to adopt an explicit, hypothesis-testing strategy to correct errors during learning, thereby accruing a pool of verbalizable rules and exhibiting performance breakdown under dual-task conditions, characteristic of a selective mode of learning. Reducing errors during learning was predicted to minimize the involvement of explicit hypothesis testing leading to the adoption of an unselective mode of learning, distinguished by few verbalizable rules and robust performance under secondary task loading. Both studies supported these predictions. The golf putting performance of errorless learners in both studies was unaffected by the imposition of a secondary task load, whereas the performance of errorful learners deteriorated. Reducing errors during learning limited the number of error-correcting hypotheses tested by the learner, thereby reducing the contribution of explicit processing to skill acquisition. It was concluded that the reduction of errors during learning encourages the use of implicit, unselective learning processes, which confer insusceptibility to performance breakdown under distraction.

It Pays to Go Off-Track: Practicing with Error-Augmenting Haptic Feedback Facilitates Learning of a Curve-Tracing Task

“…While these learners typically experienced decrements in performance on retention and transfer tests (Armstrong, 1970; Singer and Gaines, 1975; Singer and Pease, 1976), a few studies have shown that some benefits of guided practice persist during unguided performance (Wulf et al, 1998; Marchal-Crespo and Reinkensmeyer, 2008; Marchal-Crespo et al, 2010). Furthermore, other studies that minimized errors through the low-to-high progression of task difficulty over the course of practice, have shown this errorless practice approach led to better retention and transfer (Maxwell et al, 2001; Poolton et al, 2005) as well as protected against performance decrements under secondary task loading in both adults (Maxwell et al, 2001; Poolton et al, 2005) and children (Capio et al, 2013). These benefits have been attributed to the release of working memory when learning under errorless conditions and the continued release of working memory during subsequent performance (Poolton et al, 2005).…”

“…Nonetheless, proponents of errorless learning believe that the experience of errors, especially early in learning, can lead to frustration, practice of undesirable behaviors which must later be unlearned, and lack of positive reinforcement (Singer, 1977), none of which are particularly beneficial for learning. Although this idea first emerged with animal studies in the context of discrimination learning (Terrace, 1963), it has since been implemented using prompts and cues (Singer and Gaines, 1975), physical guidance (Holding and Macrae, 1964, 1966; Armstrong, 1970) and task constraints (Maxwell et al, 2001; Capio et al, 2013) for learning a variety of motor skills. Studies have shown that learners who experienced minimized errors, through some form of guidance or prompting during practice, performed better during acquisition than groups who experienced trial-and-error learning conditions (Armstrong, 1970; Singer and Gaines, 1975; Singer and Pease, 1976; Wulf et al, 1998).…”

Motor Skill Learning in Groups: Some Proposals for Applying Implicit Learning and Self-Controlled Feedback. [Aprendizaje de habilidades/destrezas motoras en grupos: Propuestas para la Aplicación de Aprendizaje Implícito, autocontrolado y retroalimentado].

“…Making hardly any errors hampers hypothesis testing about how movement performance can be optimized, and hence, little or no declarative knowledge will be accumulated. Error-minimizing learning has been successfully used to induce implicit motor learning in, for instance, golf putting and ball throwing, with the participants initially practicing at close distance to the hole or target but with the distance slowly being increased to enhance learning (Maxwell, Masters, Kerr & Weedon, 2001;Capio et al, 2013). A third, more contentious, method for implicit learning is learning with an external focus of attention.…”

Investigating an errorless learning approach for developing dental operative technique skills: A pilot study

“…14 Implicit motor learning approaches aim to prevent accumulation of explicit knowledge by minimising hypothesis testing about how to complete a task; hence, participants do not learn from errors (trial and error learning) or by discovery. 3,15 Due to these constraints on hypothesis testing during practice, it has been demonstrated that learners have conscious access to far less knowledge of their motor performance than in unconstrained practice conditions (1,2 for recent review, 3,11,16). Studies have also shown that performance following implicit motor learning tends to be robust in retention and transfer tests, when multitasking, 1,11,15,[17][18][19] under psychological stress 1,18,20,21 or when fatigued.…”

“…3,15 Due to these constraints on hypothesis testing during practice, it has been demonstrated that learners have conscious access to far less knowledge of their motor performance than in unconstrained practice conditions (1,2 for recent review, 3,11,16). Studies have also shown that performance following implicit motor learning tends to be robust in retention and transfer tests, when multitasking, 1,11,15,[17][18][19] under psychological stress 1,18,20,21 or when fatigued. 22,23 A range of implicit motor learning approaches has been shown to be effective, including dual-task learning (eg golf putting), 1,20 errorless learning, 15,16,24,25 learning by analogy (eg table tennis), 18 learning by observation without instructions (eg suture/knot tying) 11 ; even subliminal learning approaches have been used.…”