Academic journal article Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Maximizing Performance Feedback Effectiveness through Videotape Replay and Self-Controlled Learning Environment

Academic journal article Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Maximizing Performance Feedback Effectiveness through Videotape Replay and Self-Controlled Learning Environment

Article excerpt

Much attention has been directed toward examining the quality and quantity of feedback most influential in promoting efficient learning of cognitive and motor skills. Most research has been devoted to identifying the ideal absolute and relative quantifies of feedback that should be administered at particular time intervals.

Quantity of Feedback

Early studies of feedback led researchers to theorize that delivering post response information after every trial was the ideal method for fostering efficient learning (e.g., Bilodeau & Bilodeau, 1958). More recently, researchers have used transfer designs to determine the extent of learning beyond initial acquisition trials (see Salmoni, Schmidt, & Walter, 1984, for a comprehensive review). Using transfer designs, results obtained from studies of absolute and relative frequencies, trials delay, summary, and fading schedules of feedback have given credence to the idea of a guidance mechanism that mediates feedback effectiveness (e.g., Adams, Goetz, & Marshall, 1972; Lavery & Suddon, 1962; Lorge & Thorndike, 1935; Newell, 1974; Schmidt, Young, Shapiro, & Swinnen, 1989; Winstein, 1987; Winstein & Schmidt, 1990).

Specifically, it appears that feedback is a means to guide performers' actions. In many studies, increasing the absolute and relative amounts of feedback facilitated performance during the acquisition period of learning. In contrast, when guidance was withdrawn (in the no-feedback retention phase of assessment), performance tended to decrease in groups receiving relatively larger amounts of feedback as compared to those receiving less. It has been suggested that this indicates a decrement in learning due to over-reliance on the guiding properties of the feedback. These early studies of performance and learning effects led to a greater understanding of effective methods for delivering feedback and provided a theoretical basis for the role of postresponse information in motor learning (Magill, 1994; Salmoni et al., 1984).

Quality of Feedback

Regarding feedback quality, there has been recent debate about the generalizability of findings from primarily outcome-related feedback studies to more real-world applications of movement-related information feedback (Kernodle & Carlton, 1992; Magill, 1994; Wallace & Hagler, 1979; Young & Schmidt, 1992). Postresponse, augmented information regarding the outcome of the movement - defined as knowledge of results (KR) - is delivered in reference to how well the performer reached the performance goal. In contrast, postresponse, augmented information regarding a particular movement - defined as knowledge of performance (KP) - refers to feedback directed toward the actual kinematics used during performance of the skill (Salmoni et al., 1984).

Although the nature of the information conveyed is distinct, it appears that both types of feedback are operationally similar in regard to the absolute and relative quantities required (Magill, 1993; Schmidt, 1988;Young & Schmidt, 1992). However, Seidentop (1991) has suggested that the accuracy, type, and frequency of feedback given in most athletic settings is not optimal. Descriptive statistics regarding the type of feedback most often delivered point to a lack of constructive, evaluative input regarding movement execution (KP) compared with the abundance of input regarding the outcome of performances (KR) (Fishman & Tobey, 1978). Most conclusions have been based primarily on studies employing simple movements in which the augmented effects of kinematic information would be minimized relative to providing outcome-related feedback.

A lack of consistent support has been found for the augmented benefits of providing KP rather than KR, using simple tasks such as a coincident timing task (e.g., Young & Schmidt, 1992). However, tasks such as these are limited in the degrees of freedom required to perform the skill effectively and are not necessarily representative of the multiple opportunities for error that are available during performance of most common sport skills. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.