160 likes | 340 Views
1. Augmented Feedback. Chapter 15 – slide set 2. 1. 2. 3. Feedback “scheduling”. Reducing guidance…improving learning Relative frequency…less is more Summary…100% feedback but only 10% of the time Self-selected frequency (tend to choose less frequent)
E N D
1 Augmented Feedback Chapter 15 – slide set 2
1 2 3 Feedback “scheduling” • Reducing guidance…improving learning • Relative frequency…less is more • Summary…100% feedback but only 10% of the time • Self-selected frequency (tend to choose less frequent) • Choose to get feedback when accurate, and works best when the choice is after performance (Chiviakowsky & Wulf, 2005) • Bandwidth feedback…
1 Feedback “scheduling” 0% (no) bandwidth (100%KR) 10% bandwidth (?% KR) 425ms “…..” “…..” 575ms 425ms 475ms 525ms 575ms 450 Target (500ms) ‘Correct’ 550
1 Feedback “scheduling” • Reducing guidance…improving learning • Bandwidth feedback… • Provides guidance (correction) only when necessary (big errors) • Also tells people NOT to correct when they are reasonably accurate
1 2 3 Feedback “scheduling” • Bandwidth feedback…more than just a relative frequency effect From: Lee and Carnahan (1990)
1 Feedback “scheduling” • Bandwidth feedback…effects on performance? • “Blocking”…similar to guidance ideas • When you increase the bandwidth, you decrease relative frequency of feedback • In doing so you reduce “blocking” of sensory feedback • Maladaptive short-term corrections
1 Feedback “scheduling” • Bandwidth feedback…effects on performance? • Maladaptive short-term corrections • Increased bandwidths reduce attempts to correct very small errors in performance • Note influence of “no-feedback” trials
1 Feedback “scheduling” • Bandwidth feedback…learning? • Larger bandwidths (up to a point) may improve learning • Cause: • Blocking • Reduction in MSTC. • You want the bandwidth to be sized so that it reduces RF to an appropriate level and reduce the occurrence of MSTC
1 More recent findings • Recent research has suggested guidance ideas are not always accurate • Sometimes frequent feedback seems desirable even for learning • The effect of the feedback on attentional focus seems to be important
Wulf & Shea (1999) (ski sim.) Concurrent feedback The more often feedback was presented, the better people performed Why? 1 2 High frequency is good • Smith, Taylor, & Withers (1997) (golf chip) • Terminal feedback • BW (10%) better than BW (0%), for transitional feedback Performance improvement Performance improvement
Retention data from a soccer kicking study Pay attention to: Feedback frequency Attentional focus Interaction between the two 1 2 High frequency can be good
Another way of looking at that data… 1 High frequency can be good
The feedback statements... Internal Focus Feedback • Position your foot below the ball’s midline to lift the ball • Position your bodyweight and the non-kicking foot behind the ball • Lock your ankle down and use the instep to strike the ball • Keep your knee bent as you swing your leg back and straighten your knee before contact • To strike the ball, the swing of the leg should be as long as possible External Focus Feedback • Strike the ball below it’s midline to lift it, that is, kick underneath it • Be behind the ball, not over it, and lean back • Stroke the ball toward the target as though passing to another player • Use a long-lever action like the swing of a golf club before contact with the ball • To strike the ball, create a pendulum-like motion with as long a duration as possible