The Effectiveness of Different Types of Verbal Feedback on Learning Complex Movement Tasks
Languages of publication
Purpose. The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of different types of verbal feedback in the learning of a complex movement task. Methods. Twenty university students took part in a six-week training course learning how to correctly execute the vertical jump. The participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Group E&P received verbal feedback on errors made during movement execution and on how to improve, Group P obtained verbal feedback only when they correctly performed the task, and Group E was provided with verbal feedback only when an error was made. Performance was measured on three separate occasions, before the training course (pre-training), one day after (post-training) and seven days after completing the course (retention) by executing the vertical jump in front of three gymnastic judges who scored their performance on a scale of 1 to 10. Jump kinematics were also measured pre-training and post-training by recording landing force and flight time on a force platform. Results. Post-hoc comparison indicated that a significant improvement in performance was observed only in the group receiving verbal feedback on errors (E). Judges’ scores received in post-training were significantly higher than those measured pre-training (10.3 %; p < 0.0003) and further increased to 14.4 % in the retention test (p < 0.0001). Judges’ scores for the groups receiving verbal feedback on errors and correctness (E&P) and only correctness (P) improved insignificantly. Conclusions. Providing too much verbal feedback when learning the vertical jump turned out to be less effective than providing limited verbal feedback only when errors were made.
1 - 06 - 2013
11 - 07 - 2013
- 1. Adams J.A., Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychol Bull, 1987, 101, 41-74, doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.41.[Crossref]
- 2. Salmoni A.W., Schmidt R.A., Walter C.B., Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. Psychol Bull, 1984, 95, 355-386, doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.355.[Crossref]
- 3. Swinnen, S.P., Information feedback for motor skill learning: A review. In: Zelaznik H.N. (ed.), Advances in motor learning and control. Human Kinetics, Champaign 1996, 37-66.
- 4. Wulf G., Shea C.H., Understanding the role of augmented feedback: The good, the bad and the ugly. In: Williams A.M., Hodges N.J. (eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research theory and practice. Routledge, London 2004, 121-144.
- 5. Zemková E., Hamar D., The effect of task-oriented sensorimotor exercise on visual feedback control of body position and body balance. Hum Mov, 2010, 11 (2), 119-123, doi: 10.2478/v100038-010-0013-3.[Crossref]
- 6. Schmidt R.A., Lee T.D., Motor Control and Learning. A Behavioral Emphasis. Human Kinetics, Champaign 1999.
- 7. Winstein C.J., Schmidt R.A., Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. J Exp PsycholLearn Mem Cognit, 1990, 16, 677-691, doi: 10.1037/0278-73220.127.116.117.[Crossref]
- 8. Wright D.L., Smith-Munyon L., Sidaway B., How close is too close for precise knowledge of results? Res Q ExercSport, 1997, 68 (2), 172-176
- 9. Lee T.D., Carnahan H., When to provide knowledge of results during motor learning: Scheduling effects. HumPerform, 1990, 3, 87-105, doi: 0.1207/s15327043hup0302_2.
- 10. Tzetzis G., Votsis E., Kourtessis T., The effect of different corrective feedback methods on the outcome and self-confidence of young athletes. J Sports Sci Med, 2008, 7 (3), 371-378.
- 11. Laguna P., Task complexity and sources of task-related information during the observational learning process. J Sports Sci, 2008, 26, 1097-1113, doi: 10.1080/026404 10801956569.[WoS][Crossref]
- 12. Wulf G., Shea C.H., Principles derived from study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bull Rev, 2002, 9, 185-211, doi: 10.3758/ BF03196276.[Crossref]
- 13. Schmidt R.A., Lee T.D., Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioural Emphasis. 3rd edition. Human Kinetics, Champaign 1998.
- 14. Franks I.M., The use of feedback by coaches and players. In: Reilly T., Bangsbo J., Hughes M. (eds.), Science and football III. E & FN Spon, London 1997, 267-278.
- 15. Wulf G., Shea C.H., Matschiner S., Frequent feedback enhances complex motor skill learning. J Mot Behav, 1998, 30 (2), 180-192, doi: 10.1080/00222899809601335.[Crossref]
- 16. Tzetzis G., Kioumourtzoglou E., Laios A., Stergiou N., The effect of different feedback models on acquisition and retention of technique in basketball. J Hum Mov Stud, 1999, 37, 163-181.
- 17. Kernodle M.W., Carlton L.G., Information feedback and the learning of multiple-degree-of-freedom activities. J MotBehav, 1992, 24 (2), 187-196, doi: 10.1080/00222895.1992. 9941614.[Crossref]
- 18. Kernodle M.W., Johnson R., Arnold D.R., Verbal instruction for correcting errors versus such instructions plus videotape replay on learning the overhead throw. Percept Mot Skills, 2001, 92, 1039-1051, doi: 10.2466/ pms.2001.92.3c.1039.[Crossref]
- 19. Tzetzis G., Votsis E., Three feedback methods in acquisition and retention of badminton skills. Percept Mot Skills, 2006, 102, 275-284, doi: 10.2466/pms.102.1.275-284.[Crossref]
- 20. Williams A.M., Hodges J.N., Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: Challenging tradition. J SportsSci, 2005, 23 (6), 637-650, doi: 10.1080/026404104000 21328.[Crossref]
- 21. Sadowski J., Mastalerz A., Niźnikowski T., Wiśniowski W., Biegajło M., Kulik M., The effects of different types of verbal feedback on learning a complex movement task. Pol J Sport Tourism, 2011, 18, 4, 308-310, doi: 10.2478/ v10197-011-0026-2.[Crossref]
- 22. Janelle C.M., Barba D.A., Frehlich S.G., Tennant L.K., Cauraugh J.H., Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment. Res Q Exerc Sport, 1997, 68 (4), 269-279.[Crossref]
- 23. Guadagnoli M.A., Dornier L.A., Tandy R., Optimal length for summary of results: the influence of task related experience and complexity. Res Q Exerc Sport, 1996, 65, 250-257.
- 24. Magill R.A., Schoenfelder-Zohdi B., A visual model and knowledge of performance as sources of information for learning a rhythmic gymnastic skill. Int J SportPsychol, 1996, 27, 7-22.
- 25. Hewett T.E., Stroupe A.L., Nance T.A., Noyes F.R., Plyometric training in female athletes. Decreased impact forces and increased hamstring torques. Am J Sports Med, 1996, 24, 765-773, doi: 10.1177/036354659602400611.[Crossref]
- 26. Irmischer B.S., Harris C., Pfeiffer R.P., DeBeliso M.A., Adams K.J., Shea K.G., Effects of a knee ligament injury prevention exercise program on impact forces in women. J Strength Cond Res, 2004, 18 (4), 703-707.[PubMed]
- 27. Dufek J.S, Bates B.T., The evaluation and prediction of impact forces during landings. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1990, 22, 370-377[PubMed]
- 28. Prapavessis H., McNair P.J., Effects of instruction in jumping technique and experience jumping on ground reaction forces. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 1999, 29, 352-356.[Crossref]
- 29. McNair P.J., Prapavessis H., Callender K., Decreasing landing forces: Effect of instruction. Br J Sports Med, 2000, 34, 293-296, doi:10.1136/bjsm.34.4.293.[Crossref]
- 30. Onate J.A., Guskiewicz K.M., Sullivan R.J., Augmented feedback reduces jump landing forces. J Orthop SportsPhys Ther, 2001, 31, 511-517. [Crossref]
Publication order reference