Self-Controlled Practice Within a Fixed Time Period Facilitates the Learning of a Basketball Set Shot

Abstract

Allowing self-control over various modes of instructional support has been shown to facilitate motor learning. Most research has examined factors that directly altered task-relevant information on a trial-to-trial basis (e.g., feedback). Recent research suggests that self-control (SC) effects extend to the manipulation of other types of factors (e.g., total number of practice trials completed). This research also illustrated that learners sometimes select a very small amount of practice when given latitude to do so. The purpose of the current study was to examine the effects of SC practice within a fixed time period on the learning of a basketball set shot. SC participants chose when to attempt each shot within two 15-min practice sessions, thereby controlling both the total number of shots taken and the spacing of shots. Yoked participants completed the same number of shots as their SC counterparts. Spacing of shots was also matched across groups. The SC group was more accurate and had higher form scores and longer preshot times during retention. These findings provided additional support for the generalizability of SC effects and extended prior research, showing that autonomy over total practice duration was not a prerequisite for the observed effects.

Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning

“…Few studies have examined self-control of conditions that either have little or no apparent relationship to the task at hand. Exceptions in this regard include several studies by Post and colleagues (Post et al, 2011;Post, Fairbrother, Barros, & Kulpa, 2014) in which self-controlled opportunities for the number of practice attempts varied considerably between participants but resulted in better transfer or retention test performance for learner-controlled than yoked conditions. The number of practice trials is typically accorded a preeminent role among factors determining the extent of motor learning (e.g., Schmidt & Lee, 2011), yet fewer trials, if selfchosen, resulted in more effective learning than more trials imposed upon learners (Post et al, 2011(Post et al, , 2014.…”

Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning

“…Allowing learners to choose the extent of practice or the spacing of practice trials has been found to lead to more effective learning than yoked control conditions (Post, Fairbrother, & Barros, 2011;Post, Fairbrother, Barros, & Kulpa, 2014). Letting participants choose the order in which they wanted to perform balance exercises resulted in more effective learning of those exercises than not giving them this choice (Wulf & Adams, 2014).…”

Participation can make a difference to be competitive in sports: A systematic review on the relation between complex motor development and self-controlled learning settings

“…Only eight studies were appraised as having a low risk of detection bias with regard to blinding of outcome assessors. 46–53 All other studies did not provide sufficient information on outcome assessment but partially mitigated a possible distortion by measuring parameters that are rather obvious and therefore only provide a narrow margin of discretion. Potential attrition bias resulting from incomplete follow-up can largely be neglected.…”