Etracker Debug:
	et_pagename = "Journal of Human Kinetics|hukin|C|[EN]"
	
        
Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Journal of Human Kinetics

The Journal of Academy of Physical Education in Katowice

4 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2013: 0.698
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.713

Open Access
VolumeIssuePage

Open Access

The Comparison of Different Types of Observational Training on Motor Learning of Gymnastic Handstand

Farzad Maleki1 / Parvaneh Nia1 / Mehdi Zarghami1 / Abdoljalil Neisi1

Department of Sport Psychology, Faculty of Physical education & Sport Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Iran1

This content is open access.

Citation Information: Journal of Human Kinetics. Volume 26, Issue , Pages 13–19, ISSN (Online) 1899-7562, ISSN (Print) 1640-5544, DOI: 10.2478/v10078-010-0043-0, January 2011

Publication History

Published Online:
2011-01-17

The Comparison of Different Types of Observational Training on Motor Learning of Gymnastic Handstand

The present study aimed at assessing the influence of three types of observational training on motor learning of gymnastic handstand. Fifty healthy male subjects (age 20.35±1.44) from the faculty of Physical Education, University of Shahid Chamran served as the participants in the study. They were randomly assigned to three groups: 1: Actual model observation group (AOG), 2: Actual model observation and verbal description group (AOVG), 3: Animated model observation and verbal description group (AONG). Each group underwent training for 3 weeks, 3 sessions per week. The whole sample practiced the handstand skill equally ten times per session. The acquisition test was preformed after the last session while the retention test was done 48 hours later. Values of p<0.05 were chosen as significant. The results of repeated measures analysis showed that all three types of training improved the handstand skill performance for retention. As well as the acquisition phase. Furthermore, the results of ANOVA showed that there was a significant difference between the three groups regarding the acquisition test. However, there was no significant difference among the three groups regarding the retention test. Our findings revealed that observation of model with verbal teaching improves learning of the handstand skill, while observation without verbal description has no effect on learning the skills.

Keywords: Demonstration; Animation; Practice; Acquisition; Retention

  • Adams JA. Use of the model's knowledge of results to increase the observer's performance. J Hum Movement Stud, 1986. 12, 89-98.

  • Bird AM. Psychology and Sport Behavior (Hardcover). 1985. Publition: Mosby Year Book. ISBN: 9780801606007.

  • Atienza FL, Balaguer I, Garcia-Merita ML. Video modeling and imaging training on performance of tennis service of 9-to, 12-years-old children: Persept Motor Skill, 1998. 87(2), 519-29.

  • Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977. 247 p.

  • Bandura A. Analysis of modeling porcesses. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Psychoogical modeling. Psychological modeling; conflicting theories. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, LB1051. B244, 1971.

  • Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.

  • Bhatt T, Pai YC. Can observational training substitute motor training in preventing backward balance loss following an unexpected slip during walking?, J Neurophysiol 99 (2007). [Web of Science]

  • Black B, Wright DL, Magnuson CE, Brueckner S. Learning to Detect Error in Movement Timing Using Physical and Observational Practice. Res Q Exercise Sport, 2005. v76 n1 p28-41.

  • Blandin Y L, Lhuisset LP. Cognitive processes underlying observational learning of motor skills. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A, 1999. 52: pp. 957-979(23). [CrossRef]

  • Feltz DL, Landers DM, Raeder U. Enhancing self-efficacy in high avoidance motor tasks: A comparison of modeling techniques. J Sport Psychol, 1979. 1: 112-122.

  • Guadagnoli M, Holcomb W, Davis M. The efficacy of video feedback for learning the golf swing. J Sports Sci 2002;20:615-622. [CrossRef]

  • Huang CY. The effect of cooperative learning and model demonstration strategies on motor skill performance during video instruction. Proc. Natl. Sci. Counc, 2000. 10 (2), 255-265.

  • Laguna Pl. Task complexity and sources of task-related information during the observational learning process. J Sports Sci, 2008. 26: 1097 - 1113 [Web of Science] [CrossRef]

  • Magill RA. Modeling and verbal feedback influences on motor skill learning. J Sport Psychol, 1993. 24, 358-369.

  • Martens, R. Burwitz, L. Zuckerman J. Modeling Effects on Motor Performance. Research Quarterly. 1976. Vol. 47, No. 2, 277-291.

  • McCullagh P, Little W. S. A comparison of modalities in modeling. Hum Perform, 1989. 2, 101-111. [CrossRef]

  • Oxendine JB. Applied Sport Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice - Hall, New Jersey, 2002. pp: 15-27.

  • Ross D, Bird AM, Doody SG, Zoeller M. Effects of modeling and videotape feedback with knowledge of results on motor performance. Human Movement Sci, 1985.4, 149 157.

  • Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis 4th Edn., Champaign, IL; Windsor, ON: Human Kinetics Europe Ltd, 2005. ISBN 987-964-5547-95-8.

  • Scully DM, Newell KM. Observational learning and the acquisition of motor skills, toward a visual perception perspective. J. Human Movement Stud., 1985. 11, PP: 169-186.

  • Shafizade M. Effects abservational practice and gender on the self-efficacy and learningof aiming skill. J. Applied Sci, 2007. 7/17) 2490-2494.

  • Shea CH, Wright DL, Wulf G. Whitacre C., Physical and observational practice affords unique learning opportunities. J. Motor Behavior, 2000. 32, PP: 27-36.

  • Sheffield FD, Theoretical Consideration in the Learning of Complex Sequential Task from Demonstration and Practice. In: Student Response in Programmed Instruction, (Lumsdaine AA.(Ed.). 1961. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council.

  • Sidaway B. Hand M. J. Frequency of modeling offects on the acquisition and retention of a motor skill. Res. Q. Exercise Sport, 1993. 64, PP: 122-125.

  • Singer RN, Hausenblas HA, Janelle CM. Handbook of Sport Psychology. 2nd Edn., 2001. New York: Wiley and Sons

  • Sooho S, Kimberly T, McCullagh PA comparison of modeling and imagery on the performance of a motor skill. J. Sport Behav, 2004. 27 (4), p: 349-366. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-125568947/comparison-modeling-and-imagery.html http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-125568947/comparison-modeling-and-imagery.html

  • Spencer JH, Nicola JH, Mark AS, Robert RH, Mark WA. Scaling a motor skill through observation and practice. J. Motor Behav, 2006. 38: 357-366.

  • Weeks DL. A comparison of modeling modalities in the observational learning of an externally paced skill. Res Q Exercise Sport, 1992. 63, 373-380. [CrossRef]

  • Weir PL, Leavitt JL. Effects of models skill level and model's knowledge or results on the performance of a dart throwing task. Human Movement Sci, 1990. 9, pp: 369-383

  • Weiss MR. Modeling and motor performance: A developmental perspective. Res. Q. Exercise Sport, 1983. 54, 190-197.

  • Weiss MR, Klint KA. Show and tell in the gymnasium. Res. Q. Exercise Sport, 1987. 58, 234-241. What's the difference between Divisions I, II and III? Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.org/ on February 19, 2004. http://www.ncaa.org/ [CrossRef]

  • Zetou E, Tzetzis G, Vernadakis N. Modeling in learning two volleyball skills. Percept Motor Skill, 2002. 94(3PART2), pp. 1131-1142. [CrossRef]

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.