Which Presentation Speed Is Better for Learning Basketball Tactical Actions Through Video Modeling Examples? The Influence of Content Complexity.

human movement instructional designs physical education tactical learning videos

Journal

Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
received: 15 07 2019
accepted: 03 10 2019
entrez: 8 11 2019
pubmed: 7 11 2019
medline: 7 11 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The present experiment examined the effect of content complexity on perceived cognitive load and game performance when learning basketball tactical actions from videos modeling examples displayed at different speeds. A two (presentation speed: slow vs. normal) × three (content complexity: low vs. medium vs. high) design between subjects was adopted in the experiment. Following the learning phase, 120 secondary school students were quasi-randomly assigned to six experimental conditions and required to rate their perceived cognitive and game performance. Data analyses revealed that for low complexity content, both speeds of presentation have similar effects on learning. Conversely, for medium and high complexity contents, participants exposed to the slow-presentation speed learned more efficiently than those exposed to the normal-presentation speed. The findings recommend the use of slow-speed videos when learning basketball tactical actions, particularly in playing systems with medium or high levels of complexity.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31695646
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02356
pmc: PMC6817615
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

2356

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 Jarraya, Rekik, Belkhir, Chtourou, Nikolaidis, Rosemann and Knechtle.

Références

Percept Mot Skills. 2002 Jun;94(3 Pt 2):1131-42
pubmed: 12186234
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003 Oct;4(10):829-39
pubmed: 14523382
Percept Mot Skills. 2001 Oct;93(2):541-55
pubmed: 11769911
Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Feb;24(1):87-114; discussion 114-85
pubmed: 11515286
Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004;27:169-92
pubmed: 15217330
Brain Lang. 2004 May;89(2):370-6
pubmed: 15068920
J Sports Sci. 2004 Feb;22(2):205-13
pubmed: 14998098
Brain Lang. 2009 Jan;108(1):10-21
pubmed: 18082250
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 05;9(12):e114355
pubmed: 25479161

Auteurs

Mohamed Jarraya (M)

UR15JS01, EM2S, Education, Motricité, Sport et Santé, High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Institut Supérieur du Sport et de l'Education Physique de Sfax, Université de Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.

Ghazi Rekik (G)

UR15JS01, EM2S, Education, Motricité, Sport et Santé, High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.

Yosra Belkhir (Y)

UR15JS01, EM2S, Education, Motricité, Sport et Santé, High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.

Hamdi Chtourou (H)

Institut Supérieur du Sport et de l'Education Physique de Sfax, Université de Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Activité Physique, Sport et Santé, UR18JS01, Observatoire National du Sport, Tunis, Tunisia.

Pantelis T Nikolaidis (PT)

Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Nikaia, Greece.

Thomas Rosemann (T)

Institute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Beat Knechtle (B)

Institute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Medbase St. Gallen Am Vadianplatz, St. Gallen, Switzerland.

Classifications MeSH