Jeffrey T. Fairbrother, David D. Laughlin, Timothy V. Nguyen
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine if high and low activity individuals differed in terms of the effects of self-controlled feedback on the performance and learning of a movement skill. The task consisted of a blindfolded beanbag toss using the non-preferred arm. Participants were pre-screened according to their physical activity level using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. An equal number of high activity (HA) and low activity (LA) participants were assigned to self-control (SC) and yoked (YK) feedback conditions, creating four groups: Self-Control-High Activity; Self-Control-Low Activity; Yoked-High Activity; and Yoked-Low Activity. SC condition participants were provided feedback whenever they requested it, while YK condition participants received feedback according to a schedule created by their SC counterpart. Results indicated that the SC condition was more accurate than the YK condition during acquisition and transfer phases, and the HA condition was more accurate than the LA condition during all phases of the experiment. A post-training questionnaire indicated that participants in the SC condition asked for feedback mostly after what they perceived to be "good" trials; those in the YK condition indicated that they would have preferred to receive feedback after "good" trials. This study provided further support for the advantages of self-controlled feedback when learning motor skills, additionally showing benefits for both active and less active individuals. The results suggested that the provision of self-controlled feedback to less active learners may be a potential avenue to teaching motor skills necessary to engage in greater amounts of physical activity.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,134,992
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,410
of 29,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,200
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#221
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
