Perceptions of competence and motor learning: performance criterion resulting in low success experience degrades learning

  • Suzete Chiviacowsky Federal University of Pelotas
  • Natália Maass Harter Federal University of Pelotas

Abstract

Recent findings have provided converging evidence for the important role of perceptions of competence on motor learning. In the present study we asked whether thwarting learners’ need to feel competent by setting a relatively high criterion for “good†performance, thereby reducing their experience of success, would degrade learning. Participants practiced a coincident-anticipation timing task and received error feedback after every other trial (50%) during the practice phase. One group (low success or LS) was informed before the beginning of practice that an error of 4 ms or less would be considered a good trial, whereas another group (high success or HS) was told that an error of 30 ms or less would be considered good performance. A third (control) group was not given a performance criterion. During practice, participants in the LS and HS groups experienced good performance (i.e., were within their criterion range) on 6.3% and 57.8% of the feedback trials, respectively. On retention and transfer (non-dominant hand) tests without feedback one day after practice, absolute errors of the HS and control groups were significantly lower than those of the LS group. Participants in the HS group reported higher levels of self-efficacy than LS and control group participants. The results demonstrate that reducing learners’ opportunities to experience success during practice degraded learning. 

References

Deci EL, Ryan RM. The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 2000; 11: 227-68.

Deci EL, Ryan RM. Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development, and Health. Can Psychol 2008; 49: 182-5.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 1977; 84: 191-215.

Bandura A. On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited. J Manag 2012; 38: 9-44.

Bandura A. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive-development and functioning. Educ Psychol 1993; 28: 117-48.

Feltz DL, Chow GM, Hepler TJ. Path analysis of self-efficacy and diving performance revisited. J Sport Exerc Psychol 2008; 30: 401-11.

Hutchinson JC, Sherman T, Martinovic N, Tenenbaum G. The Effect of Manipulated Self-Efficacy on Perceived and Sustained Effort. J Appl Sport Psychol 2008; 20: 457-72.

Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Self-controlled feedback: does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it? Res Q Exerc Sport 2002; 73: 408-15.

Patterson JT, Carter M. Learner regulated knowledge of results during the acquisition of multiple timing goals. Hum Movement Sci 2010; 29: 214-27.

Fairbrother JT, Laughlin DD, Nguyen TV. Self-controlled feedback facilitates motor learning in both high and low activity individuals. Front Psychol 2012; 3.

Badami R, VaezMousavi M, Wulf G, Namazizadeh M. Feedback After Good Versus Poor Trials Affects Intrinsic Motivation. Res Q Exerc Sport 2011; 82: 360-4.

Badami R, VaezMousavi M, Wu G, Namaziza M. Feedback About More Accurate Versus Less Accurate Trials: Differential Effects on Self-Confidence and Activation. Res Q Exerc Sport 2012; 83: 196-203.

Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Res Q Exerc Sport 2007; 78: 40-7.

Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Wally R, Borges T. Knowledge of Results After Good Trials Enhances Learning in Older Adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 2009; 80: 663-8.

Saemi E, Porter JM, Ghotbi-Varzaneh A, Zarghami M, Maleki F. Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychol Sport Exerc 2012; 13: 378-82.

Saemi E, Wulf G, Varzaneh AG, Zarghami M. Feedback after good versus poor trials enhances motor learning in children. Rev Bras Educ Fís Esporte 2011; 25: 673-81.

Avila LTG, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychol Sport Exerc 2012; 13: 849-53.

Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. Q J Exp Psychol 2010; 63: 738-49.

Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Lewthwaite R. Normative Feedback Effects on Learning a Timing Task. Res Q Exerc Sport 2010; 81: 425-31.

Chiviacowsky S, Drews R. Effects of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning in children. PLoS One 2014; 9: e88989.

Drews R, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Children’s motor skill learning is influenced by their conceptions of ability. JMLD 2013; 1: 38-44.

Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Conceptions of ability affect motor learning. J Mot Behav 2009; 41: 461-7.

Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Front Psychol 2012; 3.

Deci EL, Ryan RM. Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Can Psychol 2008; 49: 182.

Cordova DI, Lepper MR. Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. J Educ Psychol 1996; 88: 715.

Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organ Behav Hum Perform 1976; 16: 250-79.

Tafarodi RW, Milne AB, Smith AJ. The confidence of choice: Evidence for an augmentation effect on self-perceived performance. Pers Soc Psychol B 1999; 25: 1405-16.

Catania AC. Freedom and knowledge: An experimental analysis of preference in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav 1975; 24: 89-106.

Catania AC, Sagvolden T. Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav 1980; 34: 77-86.

Leotti LA, Delgado MR. The inherent reward of choice. Psychol Sci 2011.

Tiger JH, Hanley GP, Hernandez E. An evaluation of the value of choice with preschool children. J Appl Behav Anal 2006; 39: 1.

Chiviacowsky S. Self-controlled practice: Autonomy protects perceptions of competence and enhances motor learning. Psychol Sport Exerc 2014; 15: 505-10.

Stevens D, Anderson DI, O’Dwyer NJ, Williams AM. Does self-efficacy mediate transfer effects in the learning of easy and difficult motor skills? Conscious Cogn 2012; 21: 1122-8.

Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Cardozo PL. Additive benefits of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies for motor learning. Hum Mov Sci 2014; 37: 12-20.

Chauvel G, Wulf G, Maquestiaux F. Visual illusions can facilitate sport skill learning. Psychon Bull Rev 2015; 22: 717-21.

Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annu Rev Psychol 2001; 52: 1-26.

Moritz SE, Feltz DL, Fahrbach KR, Mack DE. The relation of self-efficacy measures to sport performance: A meta-analytic review. Res Q Exerc Sport 2000; 71: 280-94.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol 1982; 37: 122.

Bandura A, Wood R. Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision making. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989; 56: 805.

Sarason IG. Stress, anxiety, and cognitive interference: reactions to tests. J Pers Soc Psychol 1984; 46: 929.

Wine J. Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychol Bull 1971; 76: 92.

Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Effortless motor learning? An external focus of attention enhances movement effectiveness and efficiency. In: Bruya B, editor. Effortless attention: A new perspective in attention and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2010. p. 75-101.

Published
2015-08-12
Section
Research Articles