Cognitive Loading During and After Continuous Task Execution Alters the Effects of Self-Controlled Knowledge of Results.
closed-loop control
feedback
information processing
motor learning
motor performance
online processing
self-control
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
21
07
2019
accepted:
27
04
2020
entrez:
26
6
2020
pubmed:
26
6
2020
medline:
26
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Previous research has repeatedly demonstrated that providing learners with self-control (SC) over their feedback schedules enhances motor skill learning. Increased information processing under SC conditions has been shown to contribute to these benefits. However, the timing of critical information processing for SC participants during the acquisition of continuous tasks is unknown. The present study was designed to enhance clarity related to this issue. Participants learned a continuous tracing task under SC or yoked (YK) conditions. Groups of participants also completed a secondary cognitive load task either during or after the execution of each primary task trial. Results showed enhanced learning for SC compared to YK participants who did not complete the cognitive load task. However, this benefit was eliminated for SC participants who completed the cognitive load task either during or after the primary task. These findings suggest that effective information processing both during and after continuous task execution is critical for reaping the benefits of self-controlled practice. Further interpretations and implications of these findings as well as suggestions for future research are discussed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32581932
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01046
pmc: PMC7283715
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1046Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Woodard and Fairbrother.
Références
Front Psychol. 2012 Dec 10;3:503
pubmed: 23233843
Front Psychol. 2012 Aug 31;3:323
pubmed: 22969745
Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Dec;24(6):1879-1888
pubmed: 28224481
Res Q Exerc Sport. 1997 Dec;68(4):269-79
pubmed: 9421839
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2005 Mar;76(1):107-11
pubmed: 15810775
Psychol Res. 2017 Mar;81(2):399-406
pubmed: 26892773
Front Psychol. 2013 Jan 11;3:611
pubmed: 23430980
Res Q Exerc Sport. 1999 Sep;70(3):265-72
pubmed: 10522284
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2012 Mar;83(1):27-35
pubmed: 22428409
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2014 Jun;85(2):226-33
pubmed: 25098018
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2016 Feb;164:151-6
pubmed: 26821171
Front Psychol. 2012 Nov 02;3:458
pubmed: 23130006
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2002 Dec;73(4):408-15
pubmed: 12495242
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2011 Sep;82(3):474-81
pubmed: 21957706
Psychon Bull Rev. 2015 Oct;22(5):1383-8
pubmed: 25732095
Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Jun;47:49-59
pubmed: 26874750
J Mot Behav. 2018 May-Jun;50(3):285-292
pubmed: 28854061
Hum Mov Sci. 2012 Dec;31(6):1459-72
pubmed: 23164628
J Sports Sci. 2020 Jan;38(1):94-99
pubmed: 31648607
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2011 Dec;82(4):624-33
pubmed: 22276404
Psicothema. 2017 Nov;29(4):552-557
pubmed: 29048317
Front Psychol. 2012 Sep 11;3:338
pubmed: 22973257
Hum Mov Sci. 2015 Jun;41:9-19
pubmed: 25706605
Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):68-78
pubmed: 11392867
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2005 Mar;76(1):42-8
pubmed: 15810769
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2008 Sep;79(3):405-10
pubmed: 18816953
Percept Mot Skills. 1995 Oct;81(2):627-34
pubmed: 8570369
Front Psychol. 2014 Nov 19;5:1325
pubmed: 25477846
Hum Mov Sci. 2015 Oct;43:23-32
pubmed: 26163375
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2011 Sep;82(3):449-57
pubmed: 21957703
J Mot Behav. 1986 Mar;18(1):55-75
pubmed: 15136284