Volume 31 -                   RJMS 2024, 31 - : 0-0 | Back to browse issues page

Research code: 56263
Ethics code: IR.MUM.FUM.REC.1400.262
Clinical trials code: IR.MUM.FUM.REC.1400.262

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Iranmanesh H, Saberi Kakhki A, Taheri H, Gjewski J, Shayan A. The effect of different type of educational instruction on acquisition, retention and transfer of complex sequence task: The role of speed and accuracy strategies. RJMS 2024; 31
URL: http://rjms.iums.ac.ir/article-1-7928-en.html
Ferdowsi university of Mashhad , askakhki@um.ac.ir
Abstract:   (40 Views)

Background: Many complicated human motor behaviors are executed in accordance with some kind of order or sequence. Consequently, understanding the movement sequence is considered an essential and crucial aspect of the life of individuals (1). In recent years, many researchers in this field have emphasized developing appropriate solutions for the integrated and coordinated generation of sequence components (3-5). However, they have not yet been able to provide a single framework for this purpose. To improve learning in individuals, one of the most prevalent strategies has been to offer educational instructions, the most common of which are implicit and explicit instructions (6). Recently, experts in this field have focused on the significance of two elements, speed, and accuracy, which are the foundation of sequence learning (9). Some academics believe that speed is a beneficial component in sequence learning (9, 10,11), while others believe that performing the sequence carefully to minimize mistakes is a crucial aspect (12-15).
However, despite the studies in the field of speed and accuracy in the execution of a sequence, these two factors have only been studied indirectly and as learning measurement variables (22); no studies have directly examined the effectiveness of these two factors in learning a movement sequence. Consequently, the main objective of the present study was to explore the efficacy of techniques focused on speed and accuracy for learning and transition of movement sequences.
Methods: This study was conducted on 36 adult male volunteers aged 18 to 21 years (19.37±1.22) who met the study inclusion criteria (26). These individuals were randomly divided into three groups: speed instruction, accuracy instruction, and without any instruction (control group). The acquisition session consisted of ten 100-trial blocks (6, 30). Participants in the speed group were provided information about completing sequences fast without any concerns about the error production. Participants in the accuracy group were given information on the importance of executing sequences accurately without any concerns about the movement speed (9). Participants in the control group were not given any instructions about speed and accuracy. The dynamic arm movement task was used to test the acquisition of movement sequences. In this exercise, participants constructed sequences by pushing a lever towards successively shown objects on the screen.
After the acquisition phase, the performance of the participants in the retention and transfer of a new sequence was assessed immediately and 24 hours later in the absence of instructions (25). These stages featured a block of 100 trials. MATLAB was employed for data processing, while SPSS 22 was used for statistical analysis. Processing factors in this study comprised component response time and error of prediction. To assess the data for the phases of acquisition and retention, the 3×10 and 3×3 mixed analysis of variance tests were utilized, whereas the independent samples t-test was used for the transfer phase.
Results: The results of a 3×10 mixed variance analysis revealed that the within-group (block) effect was significant for the variables of element response time and error of prediction, indicating a tendency for speed and accuracy to increase in the last blocks relative to the first blocks (P<0.05). As a consequence, general progress has occurred in the acquisition phase. In addition, the 3×3 mixed variance analysis in the retention phase revealed that the average element response time error of prediction in the 24-hour retention test was considerably lower than in the final block of the acquisition phase (P<0.05). In addition, the interactive effect of block and group was significant in both the acquisition and retention phase; therefore, the effect of the block on element response time and error of prediction in the speed and accuracy of instructions had the greatest effect in both the training and testing phases (P<0.05). Consequently, the manner of training instruction influenced the overall growth and learning of the movement sequence.
Lastly, the results of the independent samples t-test in the transfer phase indicated no significant differences between the mean error of prediction of the experimental groups (P>0.05); however, the speed instruction group performed significantly better than the other research groups when implementing a new sequence in terms of element response time (P<0.05).
Conclusion: The results demonstrated that speed instruction outperformed alternative training methods in both the 24-hour retention and executed novel sequence, which supports the hypothesis of the association between elements and chunking (10, 16). In these hypotheses, it is stated that the speed in the execution of the sequence improves the chunking process and the understanding of the interaction between the elements of a sequence by reducing the time delay between the components of a sequence and placing them in subsequences, thereby enhancing learning (10).
In contrast, the accuracy group with the priority of error prevention has the lowest error rate, and as a consequence, the execution speed of sequence components has dropped owing to the trade-off between accuracy and speed (21). This suggests that prevention of error has resulted in the conscious and deliberate execution of a sequence (6, 13). Thus, decreased pace of information processing, and disruption in sequence learning has been established (10). So, by the result, speed instruction group had greater effects on motor learning in retention and transfer phase related to the accuracy and control group.
On the other hand, during the transfer phase, the accuracy instruction group demonstrated greater speed than the control group while completing the new movement sequence. This variation in performance was attributable to the function of instruction presentation throughout the acquisition period. In the acquisition phase of this study, the control group participants did not receive any explicit instructions or techniques, unlike the accuracy group participants who were required to execute the sequence with the fewest errors. In the meanwhile, experts recognize the important role of instructions in motor learning (6, 9, 7, 37). Participants in the instruction group, on the other hand, properly integrated the muscle activation pattern to generate the sequence because they made fewer errors during the learning phase, while those in the control group had diverse patterns of muscle activation owing to the absence of a clear strategy. Shea et al. (2019) consider the varied muscular activation pattern as one of the key causes in the learning disorder of sequential tasks throughout the memorizing and transition phase (5).
Therefore, the results of the present study indicated that a speed-based strategy is an optimal method for learning and transitioning a new movement sequence in a difficult sequential activity.
 
     
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Exercise Physiology

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Razi Journal of Medical Sciences

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb