Cargando…

Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)

The learning advantages of self-controlled feedback schedules compared to yoked schedules have been attributed to motivational influences and/or information processing activities with many researchers adopting the motivational perspective in recent years. Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005) found that feed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carter, Michael J., Carlsen, Anthony N., Ste-Marie, Diane M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4237043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25477846
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01325
_version_ 1782345282387705856
author Carter, Michael J.
Carlsen, Anthony N.
Ste-Marie, Diane M.
author_facet Carter, Michael J.
Carlsen, Anthony N.
Ste-Marie, Diane M.
author_sort Carter, Michael J.
collection PubMed
description The learning advantages of self-controlled feedback schedules compared to yoked schedules have been attributed to motivational influences and/or information processing activities with many researchers adopting the motivational perspective in recent years. Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005) found that feedback decisions made before (Self-Before) or after a trial (Self-After) resulted in similar retention performance, but superior transfer performance resulted when the decision to receive feedback occurred after a trial. They suggested that the superior skill transfer of the Self-After group likely emerged from information processing activities such as error estimation. However, the lack of yoked groups and a measure of error estimation in their experimental design prevents conclusions being made regarding the underlying mechanisms of why self-controlled feedback schedules optimize learning. Here, we revisited Chiviacowsky and Wulf’s (2005) design to investigate the learning benefits of self-controlled feedback schedules. We replicated their Self-Before and Self-After groups, but added a Self-Both group that was able to request feedback before a trial, but could then change or stay with their original choice after the trial. Importantly, yoked groups were included for the three self-controlled groups to address the previously stated methodological limitation and error estimations were included to examine whether self-controlling feedback facilitates a more accurate error detection and correction mechanism. The Self-After and Self-Before groups demonstrated similar accuracy in physical performance and error estimation scores in retention and transfer, and both groups were significantly more accurate than the Self-Before group and their respective Yoked groups (p’s < 0.05). Further, the Self-Before group was not significantly different from their yoked counterparts (p’s > 0.05). We suggest these findings further indicate that informational factors associated with the processing of feedback for the development of one’s error detection and correction mechanism, rather than motivational processes are more critical for why self-controlled feedback schedules optimize motor learning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4237043
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42370432014-12-04 Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005) Carter, Michael J. Carlsen, Anthony N. Ste-Marie, Diane M. Front Psychol Psychology The learning advantages of self-controlled feedback schedules compared to yoked schedules have been attributed to motivational influences and/or information processing activities with many researchers adopting the motivational perspective in recent years. Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005) found that feedback decisions made before (Self-Before) or after a trial (Self-After) resulted in similar retention performance, but superior transfer performance resulted when the decision to receive feedback occurred after a trial. They suggested that the superior skill transfer of the Self-After group likely emerged from information processing activities such as error estimation. However, the lack of yoked groups and a measure of error estimation in their experimental design prevents conclusions being made regarding the underlying mechanisms of why self-controlled feedback schedules optimize learning. Here, we revisited Chiviacowsky and Wulf’s (2005) design to investigate the learning benefits of self-controlled feedback schedules. We replicated their Self-Before and Self-After groups, but added a Self-Both group that was able to request feedback before a trial, but could then change or stay with their original choice after the trial. Importantly, yoked groups were included for the three self-controlled groups to address the previously stated methodological limitation and error estimations were included to examine whether self-controlling feedback facilitates a more accurate error detection and correction mechanism. The Self-After and Self-Before groups demonstrated similar accuracy in physical performance and error estimation scores in retention and transfer, and both groups were significantly more accurate than the Self-Before group and their respective Yoked groups (p’s < 0.05). Further, the Self-Before group was not significantly different from their yoked counterparts (p’s > 0.05). We suggest these findings further indicate that informational factors associated with the processing of feedback for the development of one’s error detection and correction mechanism, rather than motivational processes are more critical for why self-controlled feedback schedules optimize motor learning. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4237043/ /pubmed/25477846 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01325 Text en Copyright © 2014 Carter, Carlsen and Ste-Marie. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Carter, Michael J.
Carlsen, Anthony N.
Ste-Marie, Diane M.
Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title_full Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title_fullStr Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title_full_unstemmed Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title_short Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of Chiviacowsky and Wulf (2005)
title_sort self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner’s performance: a replication and extension of chiviacowsky and wulf (2005)
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4237043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25477846
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01325
work_keys_str_mv AT cartermichaelj selfcontrolledfeedbackiseffectiveifitisbasedonthelearnersperformanceareplicationandextensionofchiviacowskyandwulf2005
AT carlsenanthonyn selfcontrolledfeedbackiseffectiveifitisbasedonthelearnersperformanceareplicationandextensionofchiviacowskyandwulf2005
AT stemariedianem selfcontrolledfeedbackiseffectiveifitisbasedonthelearnersperformanceareplicationandextensionofchiviacowskyandwulf2005