Systematically increasing contextual interference is beneficial for learning sport skills

Journal of Sports Sciences

Volumn 28, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1277-1285

  Porter, Jared M ^a   Magill, Richard A ^b  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Basketball; Coaching; Golf; Practice schedules

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BASKETBALL; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LONG TERM MEMORY; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SPORT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BASKETBALL; FEMALE; GOLF; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RETENTION (PSYCHOLOGY); SPORTS; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY); YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77957943045     PISSN: 02640414     EISSN: 1466447X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2010.502946     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Aloupis, C. H., Guadagnoli, M. A., & Kohl, R. M. (1995). Manipulation of task switches during acquisition: A test of traditional contextual interference hypotheses. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 29, 171-180
2. Barreiros, J., Figueiredo, T., & Godinho, M. (2007). The contextual interference effect in applied settings. European Physical Education Review, 3, 195-208
3. Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowledge about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bjork, R. A. (1999). Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII. Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application (pp. 435-459). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, i, 307-310
6. Boyce, B. A., Coker, C. A., & Bunker, L. K. (2006). Implications for variability of practice from pedagogy and motor learning perspectives: Finding common ground. Quest, 58, 330-343
7. Brady, F. (1997). Contextual interference and teaching golf skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 347-350
8. Brady, F. (1998). A theoretical and empirical review of the contextual interference effect and the learning of motor skills. Quest, 50, 266-293
9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
11. Gentile, A. M. (1972). A working model of skill acquisition with application to teaching. Quest, 17, 3-23
12. Goode, S. L., & Wei, P. (1988). Differential effects of variations of random and blocked practice on novice learning of an open motor skill. In D. L. Gill & J. E. Clark (Eds.), Abstracts of Research Papers (p. 230). American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Annual Convention, Kansas City, MO. Reston, VA: AAHPHERD.
13. Guadagnoli, M. A., Holcomb, W. R., & Weber, T. J. (1999). The relationship between contextual interference effects and performer expertise on the learning of a putting task. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 37, 19-36
14. Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 212-224
15. Hebert, E. P., Landin, D., & Solmon, M. A. (1996). Practice schedule effects on the performance and learning of lowand high-skilled students: An applied study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 52-58
16. Jefferys, I. (2006). Motor learning applications for agility, part 1. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 28, 72-76
17. Landin, D., & Hebert, E. P. (1997). A comparison of three practice schedules along the contextual interference continuum. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 357-361
18. Lee, T., & Wishart, L. R. (2005). Motor learning conundrums (and possible solutions). Quest, 57, 67-78
19. Magill, R. A. (2011). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (9th edn.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Magill, R. A., & Hall, K. G. (1990). A review of the contextual interference effects in skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241-289
21. Magnuson, C. E., & Wright, D. L. (2004). Random practice can facilitate the learning of tasks that have different relative time structures. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 197-202
22. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97
23. Newell, K., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225-260
25. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor learning and control: A behavioral emphasis (4th edn.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
26. Shea, C. H., Kohl, R., & Indermill, C. (1990). Contextual interference: Contributions to practice. Acta Psychologica, 73, 145-157
27. 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 and Memory, 5, 179-187
28. Shea, J. B., & Zimny, S. T. (1983). Context effects in memory and learning movement information. In R. A. Magill (Ed.), Memory and control of action (pp. 345-366). New York: North-Holland.
29. Thomas, J. R., & Nelson, J. K. (2001). Research methods in physical activity (4th edn.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.