Resolving a Conflict between Sensory Feedback and Knowledge of Results, While Learning a Motor Skill
Martinus J. A. Buekers, Richard A. Magill, Katrien M. Sneyers
Abstract
Martinus J. A. Buekers, Richard A. Magill, Katrien M. Sneyers
Abstract
In a recent study, Buekers, Magill, and Hall (1992) showed that even when verbal knowledge of results (KR) was redundant with sensory feedback, erroneous KR influenced the learning of motor skills. To determine why this occurred, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, subjects performed 50 practice trials on a complex anticipation task and then performed three non-KR retention tests of 25 trials each. The results indicated that when correct KR and erroneous KR were provided alternately, subjects ignored the erroneous KR and performed according to the correct KR. Experiment 2 compared different ratios of no KR to erroneous KR. The results showed that, for low ratios (1:1 and 4:1), learning experience was similar to a condition in which erroneous KR was presented on all trials. For a higher ratio (9:1), however, learning performance was similar to performance when KR was correct on all trials or was not presented. These results are interpreted as support for the hypothesis that when two conflicting sources of information are available, the subject's degree of uncertainty about the valid source of information influences his selection of the information to guide performance.
OpenAlex reports 27 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In a recent study, Buekers, Magill, and Hall (1992) showed that even when verbal knowledge of results (KR) was redundant with sensory feedback, erroneous KR influenced the learning of motor skills. To determine why this occurred, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, subjects performed 50 practice trials on a complex anticipation task and then performed three non-KR retention tests of 25 trials each. The results indicated that when correct KR and erroneous KR were provided alternately, subjects ignored the erroneous KR and performed according to the correct KR. Experiment 2 compared different ratios of no KR to erroneous KR. The results showed that, for low ratios (1:1 and 4:1), learning experience was similar to a condition in which erroneous KR was presented on all trials. For a higher ratio (9:1), however, learning performance was similar to performance when KR was correct on all trials or was not presented. These results are interpreted as support for the hypothesis that when two conflicting sources of information are available, the subject's degree of uncertainty about the valid source of information influences his selection of the information to guide performance.
Key concepts: Knowledge of results, Anticipation (artificial intelligence), Motor learning, Psychology, Cognitive psychology, Task (project management), Motor skill, Audiology