Limits...
Effects of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning in children.

Chiviacowsky S, Drews R - PLoS ONE (2014)

Bottom Line: In the first experiment, using soccer ball kicking at a target as a task, providing participants with generic feedback resulted in worse performance than providing non-generic feedback, after both groups received negative feedback.The second experiment measured more permanent effects.Feedback implying that performance is malleable, rather than due to an inherent ability, seems to have the potential to inoculate learners against setbacks--a situation frequently encountered in the context of motor performance and learning.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Physical Education, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.

ABSTRACT
Non-generic feedback refers to a specific event and implies that performance is malleable, while generic feedback implies that task performance reflects an inherent ability. The present study examined the influences of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor performance and learning in 10-year-old children. In the first experiment, using soccer ball kicking at a target as a task, providing participants with generic feedback resulted in worse performance than providing non-generic feedback, after both groups received negative feedback. The second experiment measured more permanent effects. Results of a retention test, performed one day after practicing a throwing task, showed that participants who received non-generic feedback during practice outperformed the generic feedback group, after receiving a negative feedback statement. The findings demonstrate the importance of the wording of feedback. Even though different positive feedback statements may not have an immediate influence on performance, they can affect performance, and presumably individuals' motivation, when performance is (purportedly) poor. Feedback implying that performance is malleable, rather than due to an inherent ability, seems to have the potential to inoculate learners against setbacks--a situation frequently encountered in the context of motor performance and learning.

Show MeSH
Schematic of the experimental set-up and zone areas used for punctuation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3921229&req=5

pone-0088989-g001: Schematic of the experimental set-up and zone areas used for punctuation.

Mentions: A regulation-size soccer ball made of leather (circumference: 69 cm; weight: 440 g) was used. The task required participants to perform low kicks at a squared target area consisting of a piece of colored cardboard (measuring 50 cm wide and 50 cm high) attached to a wall and touching the ground, and placed at a distance of seven meters from the participants (Figure 1). The participant's goal was to kick the soccer ball so that it hit the square, which yielded a score of 3 points. Two other zones with the same-sized dimensions were drawn, to the left and right of the target. If the ball hit one of these lateral zones to the left or right side of the target, or missed the target area completely, fewer points were given (2, 1, 0).


Effects of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor learning in children.

Chiviacowsky S, Drews R - PLoS ONE (2014)

Schematic of the experimental set-up and zone areas used for punctuation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3921229&req=5

pone-0088989-g001: Schematic of the experimental set-up and zone areas used for punctuation.
Mentions: A regulation-size soccer ball made of leather (circumference: 69 cm; weight: 440 g) was used. The task required participants to perform low kicks at a squared target area consisting of a piece of colored cardboard (measuring 50 cm wide and 50 cm high) attached to a wall and touching the ground, and placed at a distance of seven meters from the participants (Figure 1). The participant's goal was to kick the soccer ball so that it hit the square, which yielded a score of 3 points. Two other zones with the same-sized dimensions were drawn, to the left and right of the target. If the ball hit one of these lateral zones to the left or right side of the target, or missed the target area completely, fewer points were given (2, 1, 0).

Bottom Line: In the first experiment, using soccer ball kicking at a target as a task, providing participants with generic feedback resulted in worse performance than providing non-generic feedback, after both groups received negative feedback.The second experiment measured more permanent effects.Feedback implying that performance is malleable, rather than due to an inherent ability, seems to have the potential to inoculate learners against setbacks--a situation frequently encountered in the context of motor performance and learning.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Physical Education, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.

ABSTRACT
Non-generic feedback refers to a specific event and implies that performance is malleable, while generic feedback implies that task performance reflects an inherent ability. The present study examined the influences of generic versus non-generic feedback on motor performance and learning in 10-year-old children. In the first experiment, using soccer ball kicking at a target as a task, providing participants with generic feedback resulted in worse performance than providing non-generic feedback, after both groups received negative feedback. The second experiment measured more permanent effects. Results of a retention test, performed one day after practicing a throwing task, showed that participants who received non-generic feedback during practice outperformed the generic feedback group, after receiving a negative feedback statement. The findings demonstrate the importance of the wording of feedback. Even though different positive feedback statements may not have an immediate influence on performance, they can affect performance, and presumably individuals' motivation, when performance is (purportedly) poor. Feedback implying that performance is malleable, rather than due to an inherent ability, seems to have the potential to inoculate learners against setbacks--a situation frequently encountered in the context of motor performance and learning.

Show MeSH