Rudisch Julian, Holzhauer Luis K H, Kravanja Karmen, Hamker Fred H, Voelcker-Rehage Claudia
Department of Neuromotor Behavior and Exercise, Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Department of Sports Analytics, Institute for Sport Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany.
NPJ Sci Learn. 2024 Oct 3;9(1):61. doi: 10.1038/s41539-024-00271-5.
Observational practice is discussed as a substitute for physical practice for motor learning and adaptation. We systematically reviewed the literature on observational practice in reaching and aiming tasks. Our objectives were to identify (i) performance differences between observational and physical practice; (ii) factors that contribute to adaptation following observational practice; and (iii) the neural correlates of observational practice. We found 18 studies, all investigated adaptation of reaching in visuomotor rotations or force-field perturbations. Results of the studies showed that observational practice led to adaptation in both, visuomotor rotation and force-field paradigms (d = -2.16 as compared to no practice). However, direct effects were considerably smaller as compared to physical practice (d = 4.38) and aftereffects were absent, suggesting that observational practice informed inverse, but not forward modes. Contrarily, neurophysiological evidence in this review showed that observational and physical practice involved similar brain regions.
观察性练习被作为运动学习和适应的身体练习的替代方式进行讨论。我们系统回顾了关于伸手和瞄准任务中观察性练习的文献。我们的目标是确定：（i）观察性练习和身体练习之间的表现差异；（ii）观察性练习后促成适应的因素；以及（iii）观察性练习的神经关联。我们找到了18项研究，所有研究都调查了在视觉运动旋转或力场扰动中伸手的适应性。研究结果表明，观察性练习在视觉运动旋转和力场范式中均导致了适应性（与无练习相比，d = -2.16）。然而，与身体练习相比（d = 4.38），直接效应要小得多，且不存在后效应，这表明观察性练习影响了逆向模式，但未影响正向模式。相反，本综述中的神经生理学证据表明，观察性练习和身体练习涉及相似的脑区。
