Ferreira Bárbara P, Malloy-Diniz Leandro F, Parma Juliana O, Nogueira Nathálya G H M, Apolinário-Souza Tércio, Ugrinowitsch Herbert, Lage Guilherme M
1 Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Percept Mot Skills. 2019 Feb;126(1):157-179. doi: 10.1177/0031512518807341. Epub 2018 Nov 6.
Many studies have attributed self-controlled feedback benefits associated with motor learning to learners' greater information processing during practice. However, individual learner characteristics like their impulsivity can also influence how people engage cognitively during learning. We investigated possible dissociations between the types of interaction in self-controlled knowledge of results (KR) and learner impulsivity levels in learning a sequential motor task. Ninety volunteers responded to the self-restraint section of the Barkley deficits in executive functioning scale, and those 60 participants with the highest ( n = 30) and lowest ( n = 30) impulsivity scores practiced a motor task involving sequential pressing of four keys in predetermined absolute and relative times. We further divided participants into four experimental groups by assigning the high- and low-impulsivity groups to two forms of KR-self-controlled absolute and yoked. Study results showed no interaction effect between impulsivity and self-controlled KR, and, contrary to expectation, self-controlled KR did not benefit learning, independently of impulsivity. However, low-impulsivity participants performed better than high-impulsivity participants on the absolute dimension of the transfer task, while high-impulsivity learners were better at the relative dimension. Cognitive characteristics of automatic and reflexive processing were expressed by the strategies used to direct attention to relative and absolute task dimensions, respectively. Low-impulsivity learners switched their attention to both dimensions at the end of practice, while high-impulsivity learners did not switch their attention or directed it only to the relative dimension at the end of the practice. These results suggest that the cognitive styles of high- and low-impulsive learners differentially favor learning distinct dimensions of a motor task, regardless of self-controlled KR.
许多研究将与运动学习相关的自我控制反馈益处归因于学习者在练习过程中更强的信息处理能力。然而，个体学习者的特征，如冲动性，也会影响人们在学习过程中的认知参与方式。我们研究了在学习一项连续运动任务时，自我控制的结果知识（KR）中的交互类型与学习者冲动性水平之间可能存在的分离情况。90名志愿者对巴克利执行功能量表中的自我约束部分做出了回应，其中冲动性得分最高（n = 30）和最低（n = 30）的60名参与者练习了一项运动任务，即在预定的绝对和相对时间内依次按下四个按键。我们通过将高冲动性组和低冲动性组分配到两种KR形式——自我控制的绝对形式和匹配形式，进一步将参与者分为四个实验组。研究结果表明，冲动性与自我控制的KR之间没有交互作用，而且与预期相反，自我控制的KR对学习没有益处，与冲动性无关。然而，在转移任务的绝对维度上，低冲动性参与者的表现优于高冲动性参与者，而高冲动性学习者在相对维度上表现更好。自动和反射性处理的认知特征分别通过用于将注意力导向相对和绝对任务维度的策略来体现。低冲动性学习者在练习结束时将注意力转移到了两个维度上，而高冲动性学习者在练习结束时没有转移注意力，或者只将注意力导向了相对维度。这些结果表明，无论自我控制的KR如何，高冲动性和低冲动性学习者的认知风格对运动任务不同维度的学习有不同的偏好。
