Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 185-211

  Wulf, Gabriele ^a   Shea, Charles H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTENTION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; LEARNING; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; REVIEW;

ATTENTION; FEEDBACK; GENERALIZATION, RESPONSE; HUMANS; MOTOR SKILLS; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 0036616617     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196276     Document Type: Review

References (181)

1. ADAMS, J. A. (1971). A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 111-149.
2. ADAMS, J. A. (1976). Issues for a closed-loop theory of motor learning. In G. E. Stemach (Ed.), Information processing in motor control and learning (pp. 229-240). New York: Academic Press.
3. ADAMS, J. A. (1987). Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 41-74.
4. ALBARET, J.-M., & THON, B. (1999). Differential effects of task complexity on contextual interference in a drawing task. Acta Psychologica, 100, 9-24.
5. AL-MUSTAFA, A. A. (1989, June). Contextual interference: Blocking within a random order. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the North American Society for the Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity, Asilomar, CA.
6. ANDERSON ,J. R., & FINCHAM, J. M. (1994). Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 1322-1340.
7. BACHMAN, J. C. (1961). Specificity vs. generality in learning and performing two large muscle motor tasks. Research Quarterly, 32, 3-11.
8. BANAJI, M. R., & CROWDER, R. G. (1989). The bankruptcy of everyday memory. American Psychologist, 44, 1185-1193.
9. BATTIG, W. F. (1972). Intratask interference as a source of facilitation in transfer and retention. In R. F. Thompson & J. F. Voss (Eds.), Topics in learning and performance (pp. 131-159). New York: Academic Press.
10. BAUMEISTER, R. F. (1984). Choking under pressure: Self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 46, 610-620.
11. BAUMEISTER, R. F., & STEINHILBER, A. (1984). Paradoxical effects of supportive audiences on performance under pressure: The home field disadvantage. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 47, 85-93.
12. BERNSTEIN, N. (1967). The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Oxford: Pergamon.
13. BJORK, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-207). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. BLANDIN, Y., PROTEAU, L., & ALAIN, C. (1994). On the cognitive processes underlying contextual interference and observational learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 18-26.
15. BORTOLI, L., ROBAZZA, C., DURIGON, V., & CARRA, C. (1992). Effects of contextual interference on learning technical sports skills. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 75, 555-562.
16. BROWN, H. S., & MESSERSMITH, L. (1948). An experiment in teaching tumbling with and without motion pictures. Research Quarterly, 18, 304-307.
17. BURWITZ, L. (1975). Observational learning and motor performance. Paper presented at the FEPSAC Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
18. CARNAHAN, H., VAN EERD, D. L., & ALLARD, F. (1990). A note on the relationship between task requirements and the contextual interference effect. Journal of Motor Behavior, 22, 159-169.
19. CARR, J., & SHEPHERD, R. (2000). Movement science: Foundations for physical therapv in rehabilitation. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
20. DEL REY, P. (1982). Effects of contextual interference on memory of older females differing in levels of physical activity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 55, 171-180.
21. DEL REY, P., WHITEHURST, M., WUGHALTER, E., & BARNWELL, B. (1983). Contextual interference and experience in acquisition and transfer. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 57, 241-242.
22. DEL REY P., WUGHALTER, M. E., & CARNES, M. (1987). Level of expertise interpolated activity, and contextual interference effects on memory and transfer. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 64, 275-284.
23. DEL REY, P., WUGHALTER, M. E., & WHITEHURST, M. (1982). The effects of contextual interference on females with varied experience in open sport skills. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 53, 108-115.
24. DEN BRINKER, B. P. L. M., & VAN HEKKEN, M. F. (1982). The analysis of slalom-type movements using a ski-simulator apparatus. Human Movement Science, 1, 91-108.
25. DURAND, M., GEOFFROI, V., VARRAY, A., & PRÉFAUT, C. (1994). Study of the energy correlates in the learning of a complex self-paced cyclical skill. Human Movement Science, 13, 785-799.
26. FARROW, D., & MASCHETTE, W. (1997). The effects of contextual interference on children learning forehand tennis groundstrokes. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 33, 47-67.
27. FERY, Y. A., & VOMHOFE, A. (2000). When will the ball rebound? Evidence for the usefulness of mental analogies in appraising the duration of motions. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 259-273.
28. FITTS, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.
29. FITTS, P. M., & POSNER, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
30. FRENCH, K. E., RINK, J. E., & WERNER, P. F. (1990). Effects of contextual interference on retention of three volleyball skills. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 71, 179-186.
31. GABLE, C. D., SHEA, C. H., & WRIGHT, D. L. (1991). Summary knowledge of results. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 62, 285-292.
32. GABRIELE, T. E., HALL, C. R., & BUCKOLZ, E. E. (1987). Practice schedule effects on the acquisition and retention of a motor skill. Human Movement Science, 6, 1-16.
33. GABRIELE, T. E., HALL, C. R., & LEE, T. D. (1989). Cognition in motor learning: Imagery effects on contextual interference. Human Movement Science, 8, 227-245.
34. GABRIELE, T. E., LEE, T. D., & HALL, C. R. (1991). Contextual interference in movement timing: Specific effects in retention and transfer. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 20, 177-188.
35. GALLWEY, W. T. (1982). The inner game of tennis. New York: Bantam Books.
36. GOODE, S. L. (1986). The contextual interference effect in learning an open motor skill. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Louisiana, Baton Rouge.
37. GOODE, S. L., & MAGILL, R. A. (1986). The contextual interference effect in learning three badminton serves. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 57, 308-314.
38. GOULD, D. (1980). The influence of motor task types on model effectiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana.
39. GUADAGNOLI, M. A., DORNIER, L. A., & TANDY, R. D. (1996). Optimal length for summary knowledge of results: The influence of task-related experience and complexity. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 67, 239-248.
40. HAGMAN, J. D. (1983). Presentation-and test-trial effects on acquisition and retention of distance and location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 9, 334-345.
41. HALL, K. G., DOMINGUES, D. A., & CAVAZOS, R. (1994). Contextual interference effects with skilled baseball players. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 78, 835-841.
42. HEBERT, E. P., LANDIN, D., & SOLMON, M. A. (1996). Practice schedule effects on the performance and learning of low-and high-skilled students: An applied study. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 67, 52-58.
43. HENRY, F. M. (1968). Specificity vs. generality in learning motor skill. In R. C. Brown, Jr., & G. S. Kenyon (Eds.), Classical studies in physical activity (pp. 328-331). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
44. HENRY, F. M., & ROGERS, D. E. (1964). Increased response latency for complicated movements and the "memory drum" theory of neuromotor reaction. Research Quarterly, 31, 448-458.
45. HOFFMAN, S. J. (1990). Relevance, application, and the development of an unlikely theory. Quest, 42, 143-160.
46. HOLDING, D. H. (1969). Learning without errors. In L. E. Smith (Ed.), Psychology of motor learning (pp. 59-81). Chicago: Athletic Institute.
47. HOLDING, D. H., & MACRAE, A. W. (1964). Guidance, restriction and knowledge of results. Ergonomics, 7, 289-295.
48. HOLDING, D. H., & MACRAE, A. W. (1966). Rate and force of guidance in perceptual-motor tasks with reversed or random spatial correspondence. Ergonomics, 9, 289-296.
49. HOMMEL, B. (1997). Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 281 -320). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
50. JAMES, W. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Dover.
51. JEANNEROD, M. (1994). The timing of natural prehension. Journal of Motor Behavior, 16, 201-211.
52. JELSMA, O., & PIETERS, J. M. (1989). Practice schedule and cognitive style interaction in learning a maze task. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3, 73-83.
53. JELSMA, O., & VAN MERRIËNBOER, J. J. G. (1989). Contextual interference: Interactions with reflection-impulsivity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 68, 1055-1064.
54. JOHANSSON, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics 14 201-211.
55. JORDAN, J. A. (1997). The effectiveness of individual and dyadic training protocols for complex skill acquisition in space fortress: A meta-analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Texas A&M University College Station.
56. KAHNEMANN, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
57. KELSO, J. A. S. (1977). Planning and efferent components in the coding of movement. Journal of Motor Behavior, 9, 33-47.
58. KELSO, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
59. KLAPP, S. (1995). Motor response programming during simple and choice reaction time: The role of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 1015-1022.
60. KOHL, R. M., & FISICARO, S. A. (1996). Response intention and imagery processes: Locus, interaction, and contribution to motor learning. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 19, 760-762.
61. KOHL, R. M., & SHEA, C. H. (1992). Pew (1966) revisited: Acquisition of hierarchical control as a function of observational practice. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 247-260.
62. LAI, Q., & SHEA, C. H. (1998). Generalized motor program (GMP) learning: Effects of reduced frequency of knowledge of results and practice variability. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 51-59.
63. LAI, Q., & SHEA, C. H. (1999). Bandwidth knowledge of results enhances generalized motor program learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 70, 79-83.
64. LAI, Q., SHEA, C. H., WULF, G., & WRIGHT, D. L. (2000). Optimizing generalized motor programs and parameter learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 71, 10-24.
65. LANDERS, D. M., & LANDERS, D. M. (1973). Teacher versus peer models: Effects of model's presence and performance level on motor behavior. Journal of Motor Behavior, 5, 129-139.
66. LAVERY, J. J. (1962). Retention of simple motor skills as a function of type of knowledge of results. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 16, 300-311.
67. LEE, T. D., & CARNAHAN, H. (1990). When to provide knowledge of results during motor learning: Scheduling effects. Human Performance, 3, 87-105.
68. LEE, T. D., & GENOVESE, E. D. (1988). Distribution of practice in motor skill acquisition: Learning and performance effects reconsidered. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 59, 277-287.
69. LEE, T. D., & GENOVESE, E. D. (1989). Distribution of practice in motor skill acquisition: Different effects for discrete and continuous tasks. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 60, 59-65.
70. LEE, T. D., & MAGILL, R. A. (1983). The locus of contextual interference in motor-skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 9, 730-746.
71. LEE, T. D., & MAGILL, R. A. (1985). Can forgetting facilitate skill acquisition? In D. Goodman, R. B. Wilberg, & I. M. Franks (Eds.), Differing perspectives on memory, learning and control (pp. 3-22). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
72. LEE, T. D., SWINNEN, S. P., & SER RIEN, D. J. (1994). Cognitive effort and motor learning. Quest, 46, 328-344.
73. LEE, T. D., & WHITE, M. A. (1990). Influence of an unskilled model's practice schedule on observational motor learning. Human Movement Science, 9, 349-367.
74. LEE, T. D., WISHART, L. R., CUNNINGHAM, S., & CARNAHAN, H. (1997). Modeled timing information during random practice eliminates the contextual interference effect. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 68, 100-105.
75. LEE, T. D., WULF, G., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1992). Contextual interference in motor learning: Dissociated effects due to the nature of task variations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44A, 627-644.
76. LIMONS, E., & SHEA, J. B. (1988). Deficient processing in learning and performance. In A. M. Colley & R. J. Beech (Eds.), Cognition and action in skilled behavior (pp. 333-347). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
77. LOCKE, L. F. (1990). Why motor learning is ignored: A case of ducks, naughty theories, and unrequited love. Quest, 42, 136-142.
78. LOTZE, R. H. (1852). Medicinische Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele (Medical psychology or physiology of the soul). Leipzig: Weidmann'sche Buchhandlung.
79. MADDOX, D., WULF, G., & WRIGHT, D. L. (2000). The effects of an internal vs. external focus of attention on the learning of a tennis backhand. Unpublished manuscript, Texas A&M University.
80. MAGILL, R. A., CHAMBERLIN, C. J., & HALL, K. G. (1991). Verbal knowledge of results as redundant information for learning an anticipation timing skill. Human Movement Science, 10, 485-507.
81. MAGILL, R. A., & HALL, K. G. (1990). A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241-289.
82. MARTENS, R., BURWITZ, L., & ZUCKERMAN, J. (1976). Modeling effects on motor performance. Research Quarterly, 47, 277-291.
83. MASSARO, D. W. (1990). An information-processing analysis of perception and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action: Current approaches (pp. 133-166). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
84. MCCULLAGH, P., WEISS, M. R., & ROSS, D. (1989). Modeling considerations in motor skill acquisition and performance: An integrated approach. In K. Pandolf (Ed.), Exercise and sport science reviews (Vol. 17, pp. 475-513). Baltimore: Williams & Wadkins.
85. MCNEVIN, N. H., SHEA, C. H., & WULF, G. (in press). Increasing the distance of an external focus of attention enhances learning. Psychological Research.
86. NEISSER, U. (1991). A case of misplaced nostalgia. American Psychologist, 46, 34-36.
87. NEISSER, U., & WINOGRAD, E. (1988). Remembering reconsidered: Ecological and traditional approaches to the study of memory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
88. NEWELL, K. M. (1991). Motor skill acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 213-237.
89. NEWELL, K. M., & SLIFKIN, A. B. (1996). The nature of movement variability. In J. Piek (Ed.), Motor control and human skill: A multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 143-159), Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
90. NICHOLSON, D. E., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1991). Scheduling information feedback to enhance training effectiveness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1400-1403). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
91. PARK, J.-H., SHEA, C. H., & WRIGHT, D. L. (2000). Reduced-frequency concurrent and terminal feedback: A test of the guidance hypothesis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 287-296.
92. PEW, R. W. (1966). Acquisition of hierarchical control over the temporal organization of a skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 764-771.
93. PIGOTT, R. E., & SHAPIRO, D. C. (1984). Motor schema: The structure of the variability session. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 55, 41-45.
94. PINTO-ZIPP, G., & GENTILE, A. M. (1995). Practice schedules in motor learning: Children vs. adults. Society of Neuroscience: Abstracts, 21, 1620.
95. POVEL, D.-J., & COLLARD, R. (1982). Structural factors in patterned finger tapping. Acta Psychologica, 52, 107-123.
96. PRINZ, W. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action (pp. 167-201). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
97. PRINZ, W. (1992). Why don't we perceive our brain states? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4, 1-20.
98. PRINZ, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.
99. PRINZ, W., ASCHERSLEBEN, G., HOMMEL, B., & VOGT, S. (1995). Handlungen als Ereignisse [Actions as events]. In D. Dörner & E. van der Meer (Eds.), Das Gedächtnis: Probleme - Trends - Perspektiven (pp. 129-168). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
100. PROCTOR, R. W., & DUTTA, A. (1993). Do the same stimulus - response relations influence choice reactions initially and after practice? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 922-930.
101. RILEY, M. A., STOFFREGEN, T. A., GROCKI, M. J., & TURVEY, M. T. (1999). Postural stabilization for the control of touching. Human Movement Science, 18, 795-817.
102. SALMONI, A. W., SCHMIDT, R. A, & WALTER, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 355-386.
103. SANDERS, A. F. (1980). Stage analysis of reaction processes. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (pp. 331-354). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
104. SCHMIDT, R. A. (1988). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
105. SCHMIDT, R. A. (1991a). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In J. Requin & G. E. Stelmach (Eds.), Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59-75). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
106. SCHMIDT, R. A. (1991b). Motor learning and performance: From principles to practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
107. SCHMIDT, R. A., & BJORK, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new principles for training. Psychological Science, 3, 207-217.
108. SCHMIDT, R. A., LANGE, C., & YOUNG, D. E. (1990). Optimizing summary knowledge of results for skill learning. Human Movement Science, 9, 325-348.
109. SCHMIDT, R. A., & WRISBERG, C. A. (2000). Motor learning and performance: A problem-based learning approach (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
110. SCHMIDT, R. A., & WULF, G. (1997). Continuous concurrent feedback degrades skill learning: Implications for training and simulation. Human Factors, 39, 509-525.
111. SCHMIDT, R. A., YOUNG, D. E., SWINNEN, S., & SHAPIRO, D. E. (1989). Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: Support for the guidance hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 352-359.
112. SCHMIDT, R. A., ZELAZNIK, H., HAWKINS, B., FRANK, J. S., & QUINN, J. T. (1979). Motor-output variability: A theory for the accuracy of rapid motor acts. Psychological Review, 47, 415-451.
113. SCHNEIDER, W., & FISK, A. D. (1983). Attention theory and mechanisms for skilled performance. In R. A. Magill (Ed.), Memory and control of action (pp. 119-143). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
114. SCHNEIDER, W., & SHIFFRIN, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1-66.
115. SCHÖNFELDER-ZOHDI, B. G. (1992). Investigating the informational nature of a modelled visual demonstration. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.
116. SCULLY, D. M., & NEWELL, K. M. (1985). Observational learning and the acquisition of motor skills: Toward a visual perception perspective. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 11, 169-186.
117. SEKIYA, H., MAGILL, R. A., & ANDERSON, D. I. (1996). The contextual interference effect in parameter modifications of the same generalized motor program. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 67, 59-68.
118. SEKIYA, H., MAGILL, R. A., SIDAWAY, B., & ANDERSON, D. I. (1994). The contextual interference effect for skill variations from the same and different generalized motor programs. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 65, 330-338.
119. SHAPIRO, D. C., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1982). The schema theory: Recent evidence and developmental implications. In J. A. S. Kelso & J. E. Clark (Eds.), The development of movement control and co-ordination (pp. 113-150). New York: Wiley.
120. SHEA C. H., KOHL, R., & INDERMILL, C. (1990). Contextual interference: Contributions of practice. Acta Psychologica, 73, 145-157.
121. SHEA, C. H., LAI, Q., WRIGHT, D. L., IMMINK, M., & BLACK, C. (2001). Consistent and variable practice conditions: Effects on generalized motor program and parameter learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 139-152.
122. SHEA, C. H., WRIGHT, D. L., WULF, G., & WHITACRE, C. (2000). Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 27-36.
123. SHEA, C. H., & WULF, G. (1999). Enhancing motor learning through external-focus instructions and feedback. Human Movement Science, 18, 553-571.
124. SHEA, C. H., WULF, G., WHITACRE, C. A. (1999). Enhancing training efficiency and effectiveness through the use of dyad training. Journal of Motor Behavior, 31, 119-125.
125. SHEA, J. B., & MORGAN, R. L. (1979). Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 5, 179-187.
126. SHEA, J. B., & TITZER, R. C. (1993). The influence of reminder trials on contextual interference effect. Journal of Motor Behavior, 25, 264-274.
127. SHEA, J. B., & ZIMNY, S. T.(1983). Context effects in learning movement information. In R. A. Magill (Ed.), Memory and the control of action (pp 345-366). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
128. SHEBILSKE, W. L., REGIAN, J. W., ARTHUR, W., & JORDAN, J. A. (1992). A dyadic protocol for training complex skills. Human Factors, 34, 369-374.
129. SHIFFRIN, R. M., & SCHNEIDER, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
130. SIDAWAY, B., & HAND, M. J. (1993). Frequency of modeling effects on the acquisition and retention of a motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 64, 122-126.
131. SINGER, R. N., LIDOR, R., & CAURAUGH, J. H. (1993). To be aware or not aware: What to think about while learning and performing a motor skill. Sport Psychologist, 1, 19-30.
132. SMITH, P. J. K., & DAVIES, M. (1995). Applying contextual interference to the Pawlata roll. Journal of Sport Sciences, 13, 455-462.
133. SWANSON, L., & LEE, T. D. (1992). The effects of aging and scheduling of knowledge of results on motor learning. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 47, 406-411.
134. SWINNEN, S. P., LEE, T. D., VERSCHUEREN, S., SERRIEN, D. J., & BOGAERDS, H. (1997). Interlimb coordination: Learning and transfer under different feedback conditions. Human Movement Science, 16, 749-785.
135. SWINNEN, S. P., SCHMIDT, R. A., NICHOLSON, D. E., & SHAPIRO, D. C. (1990). Information feedback for skill acquisition: Instantaneous knowledge of results degrades learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 706-716.
136. TARPY, R. M. (1982). Principles of animal learning and motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
137. TODOROV, E., SHADMEHR, R., & BIZZI, E. (1997). Augmented feedback presented in a virtual environment accelerates learning of a difficult motor task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 29, 147-158.
138. TSUTSUI, S., LEE, T. D., & HODGES, N. J. (1998). Contextual interference in learning new patterns of bimanual coordination. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 151-157.
139. VALLACHER, R. R., & WEGNER, D. M. (1985). A theory of action identification. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
140. VALLACHER, R. R., & WEGNER, D. M. (1987). What do people think they're doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 3-15.
141. VANDER LINDEN, D. W., CAURAUGH, J. H., & GREENE, T. A. (1993). The effect of frequency of kinetic feedback on learning an isometric force production task in nondisabled subjects. Physical Therapy, 73, 79-87.
142. VEREIJKEN, B. (1991). The dynamics of skill acquisition. Meppel: Krips Repro.
143. VEREIJKEN, B., VAN EMMERIK, R. E. A., WHITING, H. T. A., & NEWELL, K. M. (1992). Free(z)ing degrees of freedom in skill acquisition. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 133-142.
144. WEEKS, D. L., & ANDERSON, L. P. (2000). The interaction of observational learning and overt practice: Effects on motor skill learning. Acta Psychologica, 104, 259-271.
145. WEEKS, D. L., & KORDUS, R. N. (1998). Relative frequency of knowledge of performance and motor skill learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 69, 224-230.
146. WEISS, P. (1939). Principles of development. New York: Holt.
147. WELFORD, A. T. (1968). Fundamentals of skill. London: Methuen.
148. WHITACRE, C. A., & SHEA, C. H. (2000). The performance and learning of generalized motor programs: Relative (GMP) and absolute (parameter) errors. Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 163-175.
149. WHITING, H. T. A. (1988). Imitation and the learning of complex cyclical actions. In O. G. Meijer & K. Roth (Eds.), Complex motor behavior: The motor action controversy (pp. 381-401). Amsterdam: North Holland.
150. WIGHTMAN, D., & LINTERN, G. (1985). Part-task training for tracking and manual control. Human Factors, 27, 267-283.
151. WILLINGHAM, D. B. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 105, 558-584.
152. WINSTEIN, C. J., POHL, P. S., CARDINALE, C., GREEN, A., SCHOLTZ, L., & WATERS, C. S. (1996). Learning a partial-weight-bearing skill: Effectiveness of two forms of feedback. Physical Therapy, 76, 985-993.
153. WINSTEIN, C. J., POHL, P. S., & LEWTHWAITE, R. (1994). Effects of physical guidance and knowledge of results on motor learning: Support for the guidance hypothesis. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 65, 316-323.
154. WINSTEIN, C. J., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 677-691.
155. WRIGHT, D. L., LI, Y., & COADY, W. J. (1994). Cognitive processes related to contextual interference and observational learning: A replication of Blandin, Proteau, and Alain (1994). Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 68, 106-109.
156. WRIGHT, D. L., LI, Y., & WHITACRE, C. (1992). The contribution of elaborative processing to the contextual interference effect. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 63, 30-37.
157. WRIGHT, D. L., & SHEA, C. H. (2001). Manipulating generalized motor program difficulty during blocked and random practice does not affect parameter learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 72, 32-38.
158. WRISBERG, C. A. (1991). A field test of the effect of contextual variety during skill acquisition. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 11, 21-30.
159. WRISBERG, C. A., & LIU, Z. (1991). The effect of contextual variety on the practice, retention, and transfer of an applied motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 62, 406-412.
160. WULF, G. (1992). The learning of generalized motor programs and motor schemata: Effects of KR relative frequency and contextual interference. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 23, 53-76.
161. WULF, G., & BUHNER, M. (1996). Unpublished data. Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich.
162. WULF, G., HÖRGER, M., & SHEA, C. H. (1999). Benefits of blocked over serial feedback in complex motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 31, 95-103.
163. WULF, G., HÖß, M., & PRINZ, W. (1998). Instructions for motor learning: Differential effects of internal vs. external focus of attention. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 169-179.
164. WULF, G., LAUTERBACH, B., & TOOLE, T. (1999). Learning advantages of an external focus of attention in golf. Research Quaterly for Exercise & Sport, 70, 120-126.
165. WULF, G., & LEE, T. D. (1993) Contextual interference effects in movements of the same class: Differential effects on program and parameter learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 25, 254-263.
166. WULF, G., LEE, T. D., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1994). Reducing knowledge of results about relative versus absolute timing: Differential effects on learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 362-369.
167. WULF, G., MCCONNEL, N., GÄRTNER, M., & SCHWARZ, A. (in press). Feedback and attentional focus: Enhancing the learning of the volleyball serve through external-focus feedback. Journal of Motor Behavior.
168. WULF, G., MCNEVIN, N. H., & SHEA, C. H. (2001). The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 1143-1154.
169. WULF, G., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1989). The learning of generalized motor programs: Reducing the relative frequency of knowledge of results enhances memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 748-757.
170. WULF, G., & SCHMIDT, R. A. (1994). Feedback-induced variability and the learning of generalized motor programs. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 348-361.
171. WULF, G., SCHMIDT, R. A., & DEUBEL, H. (1993). Reduced feedback frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 1134-1150.
172. WULF, G., & SHEA, C. H. (1997). [Unpublished data.] Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich.
173. WULF, G., & SHEA, C. H. (1998). [Unpublished data]. Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich.
174. WULF, G., SHEA, C. H., & MATSCHINER, S. (1998). Frequent feedback enhances complex motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 180-192.
175. WULF, G., SHEA, C. H., & PARK, J.-H. (2001). Attention in motor learning: Preferences for and advantages of an external focus. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 72, 335-344.
176. WULF, G., SHEA, C. H., & WHITACRE, C. A. (1998). Physical guidance benefits in learning a complex motor skill. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 367-380.
177. WULF, G., SHEA, J. B., & RICE, M. (1996). Type of KR and KR frequency effects on motor learning. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 30, 1-18.
178. WULF, G., & WEIGELT, C. (1997). Instructions about physical principles in learning a complex motor skill: To tell or not to tell . . . Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 68, 362-367.
179. YAO, W.-X., FISCHMAN, M. G., & WANG, Y. T. (1994). Motor skill acquisition and retention as a function of average feedback, summary feedback, and performance variability. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 273-282.
180. YOUNG, D. E., COHEN, M. J., & HUSAK, W. S. (1993). Contextual interference and motor skill acquisition: On the processes that influence retention. Human Movement Science, 12, 577-600.
181. ZAMANI, M., & RICHARD, J. F. (2000). Object encoding, goal similarity, and analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition, 28, 873-886.