Douglas E. Young

Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: support for the guidance hypothesis

Summary knowledge of results (KR) involves the presentation KR for each of a set of trials (e.g., 10) only after the last trial in the set has been completed. Earlier, Lavery (1962) showed that, relative to providing KR after each trial, a 20-trial summary KR was detrimental to performance in a practice phase with KR present but was beneficial for a no-KR retention test. Using a relatively simple ballistic-timing task, we examined summary lengths of 1 (essentially KR after every trial), 5, 10, and 15 trials, searching for an inverted-U relationship between summary length and retention performance as predicated by a guidance hypothesis for KR. During acquisition when KR was present and being manipulated, all groups showed improvements in performance across practice, while increased summary lengths generally depressed performance. However, in a delayed no-KR retention test, there was an inverse relation between the summary length in acquisition and absolute constant error on the retention test. A guidance hypothesis is favored to explain how, relative to immediate KR, long KR summaries can provide detrimental effects in acquisition while enhancing retention performance.

Optimizing summary knowledge of results for skill learning

Abstract Summary knowledge of results (KR) consists of presenting KR for each of a set of trials only after the last trial in the set has been completed. In experiment 1, motivated by a guidance hypothesis for KR, we searched for an optimal number of trials to be contained in the summary KR. Using a coincident-timing task with summary lengths of 1, 5, 10, and 15 trials, in a delayed no-KR retention test of learning, we found an inverted-U relationship between summary length in acquisition and retention performance, the 5-trial group being most effective. Experiment 2 did not support the hypothesis that the enhanced retention performance of this group relative to the 1-trial group was due merely to a similarity between acquisition and retention conditions (specificity of learning). Both experiments are discussed in terms of a guidance hypothesis to explain how optimizing KR summaries can enhance learning.

Augmented Kinematic Feedback for Motor Learning

Although the study of feedback about goal achievement (knowledge of results, KR) has been important for the development principles of augmented information feedback in simple skills, there is reason to question the generalizability of these findings to many common learning situations. A more appropriate type of information for skill learning appears to be augmented kinematic (or kinetic) feedback regarding the movement pattern. The experiments presented here extend recent findings about KR to a paradigm involving kinematic feedback. In Experiment 1, we examined how several kinds of temporal and spatial kinematic information supplement KR in learning. Spatial kinematic variables were more effective than temporal variables, as indicated by performance in a retention test without kinematic feedback. In Experiment 2, we manipulated the schedule of augmented kinematic feedback in a method that paralleled previous KR work. We contrasted averaged schedules of augmented feedback, in which information was given either after every trial or as averaged information after every set of five trials. On retention tests without kinematic feedback given 1 day and 1 week after acquisition, averaged schedules led to enhanced performance over an every-trial format. Together, these results begin to define the variables important in kinematic feedback, and suggest that this feedback may influence learning in ways parallel to KR.

Transfer of Movement Control in Motor Skill Learning

Abstract : This chapter is concerned with transfer with of learning in situations involving the kinds of response that are defined primarily as motor behaviors. The authors focus on situations where movement control is learned and transferred to some of other situation. Complimentary treatments of the motor and cognitive bases of transfer are offered. Definitional and experimental design questions surrounding transfer are discussed as are a number of important principles of motor behavior and motor control which have emerged in the past few decades. Principles of movement control are also discussed in terms of understanding some of the phenomena seen in transfer of learning situations.

Methodology for Motor Learning: A Paradigm for Kinematic Feedback

Knowledge of results (KR)--information feedback about goal achievement--has been one of the most extensively examined variables in motor learning. In most natural movement learning situations, however, instructors more common]y provide augmented information regarding various kinematic or kinetic aspects of the movement pattern itself (sometimes termed knowledge of performance, KP). But despite the inherent interest in kinematic feedback, several factors reviewed here have operated to inhibit its study, the most important of which has been the lack of a suitable laboratory task and paradigm. The limitations of earlier paradigms have concerned (a) the use of overly simple motor behaviors, probably to minimize the problems in kinematic measurement, (b) the tendency for the environmental goal or the task to be isomorphic with the kinematic pattern, and (c) thc failure to use transfer or retention tests as measures of learning effects of the feedback manipulations. In this article, we describe our efforts to create a new paradigm for kinematic feedback, the rationale for its development, and the details of its operation. Finally, we provide evidence that the task and paradigm are sensitive to manipulations of kinematic feedback, providing some assurance that the paradigm can potentially answer future research questions about the role of kinematic feedback for learning.

Especial Skills: Their Emergence With Massive Amounts of Practice

Differing viewpoints concerning the specificity and generality of motor skill representations in memory were compared by contrasting versions of a skill having either extensive or minimal specific practice. In Experiments 1 and 2, skilled basketball players more accurately performed set shots at the foul line than would be predicted on the basis of the performance at the nearby locations, suggesting considerable specificity at this distance. This effect was replicated even when the lines on the court were obscured (in Experiment 2). However, the effect was absent when jump shots were executed in Experiment 3. The authors argue that massive levels of practice at 1 particular member of a class of actions produce specific effects that allow this skill to stand out from the other members of the class, giving it the status of an especial skill. Various theoretical views are proposed to account for the development of these skills.

Contextual interference and motor skill acquisition: on the processes that influence retention

Abstract Over the last decade, there have been competing explanations for the contextual interference effect in motor learning. One notion (Lee and Magill 1983) describes the effect in terms of the movement-plan reconstruction processes acquired with practice, while an alternative (Shea and Zimny 1983, 1988) emphasizes that the types of multiple processing strategies developed with practice are responsible for the effect. In this project, we examined how the various processes, as proposed by both of these explanations, influence the acquisition and retention of a simple aiming task. The methodology employed to address this problem supplemented practice schedules with various interpolated activities in the post-KR delay interval. In experiment 1, exemplar modals about the same-trial, next, or other (randomly determined) movement goal were provided to random practice conditions. Results indicated that there were detrimental and slight beneficial effects for retention when these types of models were provided, relative to a control condition. Experiment 2 further examined the post-KR delay activities that could enhance the cognitive processing associated with effective retention in both blocked and random practice. Findings from this experiment indicate that different types of interpolated activities presented in the post-KR delay interval facilitate retention for blocked practice conditions. Together, results from both experiments suggest that both elaboration and reconstruction processes can be beneficial for long-term retention.

Cars Gone Wild: The Major Contributor to Unintended Acceleration in Automobiles is Pedal Error

“Unintended-acceleration” automobile accidents typically begin when the driver first enters the car, starts the engine, and intends to press his/her right foot on the brake while shifting from Park to a drive gear (Drive or Reverse). The driver reports an unintended (uncommanded) full-throttle acceleration, coupled with a loss of braking, until the episode ends in a crash. Pedal misapplications – where the right foot contacts the accelerator instead of the brake that was intended – have been linked to these accidents (Schmidt, 1989, 1993) which, in the 1980s, were thought to occur only at the start of a driving cycle (and/or with the car in Park). But, in 1997, we identified over 200 pedal errors as the cause of accidents reported in the North Carolina database; these crashes occurred during the driving cycle (Schmidt et al., 1997), and/or with the vehicle in a gear other than Park. Our present work provides a more thorough analysis of these North Carolina Police Accident Reports from 1979 to 1995. The vast majority of pedal misapplications (over 92%) (a) occurred during the driving cycle, (b) were generally in “unhurried” conditions, and (c) were categorically separate from those events referred to as unintended-acceleration episodes at start-up. These ideas are explanatory for the recent (2009–2010) surge of unintended-acceleration reports, perhaps even suggesting that all of these crashes are caused by pedal errors, and that none of them are based on some vehicle defect(s).

Pedal Misapplications: Their Frequency and Variety Revealed through Police Accident Reports

Earlier work indicated that pedal misapplications, where the right foot contacts the accelerator instead of the brake that was intended, were mainly limited to the start of a driving cycle and the phenomenon of unintended acceleration. Our present work with the North Carolina Police Accident Report database, however, reveals that pedal misapplications are far more frequent causes of accidents than we had believed. We uncovered 219 accidents in which the driver(s) stated that the foot contacted the accelerator rather than the brake. We categorized these accidents in various ways, leading to an initial understanding of the frequency, the mechanisms, and the traffic conditions surrounding these events. Contrary to our expectations, most of the misapplications were classed as “unhurried,” and about half were caused by the foot slipping off the brake. Pedal errors during the driving cycle may occur much more frequently—and for reasons other than those previously proposed—than during start-up.

Reaction Times of Skiers and Snowboarders

Collisions with obstacles, such as trees, rocks, and other people, are a common occurrence in the sports of skiing and snowboarding. Once an obstacle becomes visible, whether or not the skier has time to avoid it is largely determined by that skier’s reaction time (RT)—the time it takes to detect and identify the obstacle, make a decision about how to respond, and initiate that response. Stopping and turning RTs were measured in ten expert skiers and four expert snowboarders at Mammoth Mountain, California. Participants were told to search for a sign along a closed intermediate course and to execute the instruction on the sign as quickly as possible. The sign was positioned such that it was not visible until participants crested a berm. Two high-speed video cameras captured the movements of each participant. RT was defined as the time between when the sign first came into view and when the skier or snowboarder initiated a response (the time of initial ski, snowboard, or body movement away from the original path or arc of the participant). The average RT for skiers and snowboarders was 856 and 1056 ms, respectively. No difference in RT was observed between stopping and turning responses. These data can be used to estimate the limits of performance for an attentive, experienced skier or snowboarder under good environmental conditions.