1. Practice Scheduling in Motor Learning

2. Adams’ Closed Loop Theory of Motor Learning
Organization
Standard
Output
Error Detector

3. Learning Paradigm
Acquisition
Retention
Transfer

4. Retention Paradigms
Retention
Recognition
Recall
Cued
Uncued or Free

5. Evolution of motor learning theory
Schema theory was Schmidt’s (1975) response to Adams’ (1971) model of motor learning.
Adams proposed a closed loop model, with specific traces for movement and feedback.
Schmidt criticized Adam’s model based on two notions: storage and novelty.
Adams’ model was restricted to linear positioning tasks, limited generalizability.

6. Schema Theory
In schema theory two memory states are hypothesized. They are: recall and recognition. The terms recall and recognition are taken from the verbal learning literature.

7. Initial Conditions Desired Outcome Past Actual Outcomes Past Response
Specifications
Past
Sensory
Consequences
Recognition
Schema
Schema
Recall
Expected
Sensory
Consequences
Response
Specifications
Schmidt (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor learning. Psychological
Review, 82,

8. Four things are stored to satisfy the goal of the movement:
Initial Conditions
Response Specifications
Sensory Consequences
Response Outcome

9. The major hypothesis generated in schema theory is the variability of practice hypothesis, one of the most tested hypotheses in motor learning literature.

10. Acquisition phase of the paradigm used to test the variability of practice hypothesis
Constant Practice AAA..., AAA..., AAA…
Variable Practice
Blocked AAA…, BBB…, CCC…
Random BAC…, CBA…, ACB…
Serial ABC…, ABC…, ABC…

11. Retention and transfer phases of the paradigm
Transfer has been tested with tasks both within and outside the range of the already practiced tasks.
Both retention and transfer have been tested.
Several studies have examined the effect of variability of practice on performance of children.

12. Schmidt’s predictions
Transfer is better to tasks within the range of the originally practiced tasks.
Variable practice produces better transfer than constant practice.

13. Schema theory still provides impetus
for research on the concept of a
generalized motor program.

14. Gentile (1972, 1987) also supported a variable practice structure for latter stages of learning and for skills that have changing features, such as: open skills and closed skills with intertrial variability.

15. Levels of Processing Framework Craik & Lockhart (1972)
Meaningfulness (Depth of Processing)
Elaboration (Breadth of Processing)
Distinctiveness
Familiarity
Encoding Retrieval Specificity

16. Levels of processing theory Craik & Lockhart (1972)
New view of memory research
Different from existing and traditional views of memory
Viewed the subject as active in the processing of information

17. Original hypothesis was presented in the Intratask Interference Theory (Battig,1966)
Intratask interference leads to intertask facilitation.

18. Battig’s (1979) Contextual interference hypothesis
Factors both intrinsic and extrinsic to the task being learned will affect the interference created, i.e., context became the key component in his hypothesis.
In 1979, Battig brought his theory in line with the levels of processing framework.

19. Contextual interference
Random practice, high contextual interference, is produced by presenting tasks in an unpredictable order of trials. In a random practice structure, subjects are required to recreate the memory trace trial after trial.
Blocked practice, low contextual interference, is produced by presenting all trials of one task before proceeding onto the next task. In a blocked practice structure subjects may hold the memory trace in short-term memory for the next trial of practice.

20. A hypothetical model of the paradoxical effect predicted
in contextual interference theory (Battig, 1979).
Good
Random
Performance
Blocked
Poor
Acquisition
Retention

21. Shea & Morgan (1979)
Shea & Morgan were the first to apply the concept of contextual interference to motor skills research.
They provided the paradigm for testing context effects in an acquisition, retention, and transfer paradigm.

22. Retention and transfer tests occurred following a 10 minute
Acquisition
Blocked Random
Retention
BL RA BL RA
Transfer
BL RA BL RA BL RA BL RA
Retention and transfer tests occurred following a 10 minute
interval, and a second delayed retention test occurred
following a 10 day retention interval.

23. Shea & Zimny (1983, 1988)
Contextual interference caused by random practice produces greater elaboration of memory for a particular category of tasks.
Shea & Zimny explained the contextual interference effect through a processing view in which multiple and varied processing strategies are used in short-term or working memory. Thus processing in a random condition forces more elaborate and distinctive traces than a blocked condition.

24. Shea & Zimny (1983) stated that conditions of high contextual interference or high intertask variability leads to increased retention “… especially when the original learning is changed (p.361).

25. Lee (1987) and Lee & Magill (1983, 1985)
Lee, and Lee and Magill proposed that forgetting from short-term or working memory occurs between trials, and thus reconstruction of the action plan occurs trial after trial.

26. Meeusen (1987)
The retroactive inhibition literature helps to explain the contextual interference effect through a discussion of the implications of blocked practice on retention and transfer.