Terminal Feedback Outperforms Concurrent Visual, Auditory, and Haptic Feedback in Learning a Complex Rowing-Type Task

Abstract

Augmented feedback, provided by coaches or displays, is a well-established strategy to accelerate motor learning. Frequent terminal feedback and concurrent feedback have been shown to be detrimental for simple motor task learning but supportive for complex motor task learning. However, conclusions on optimal feedback strategies have been mainly drawn from studies on artificial laboratory tasks with visual feedback only. Therefore, the authors compared the effectiveness of learning a complex, 3-dimensional rowing-type task with either concurrent visual, auditory, or haptic feedback to self-controlled terminal visual feedback. Results revealed that terminal visual feedback was most effective because it emphasized the internalization of task-relevant aspects. In contrast, concurrent feedback fostered the correction of task-irrelevant errors, which hindered learning. The concurrent visual and haptic feedback group performed much better during training with the feedback than in nonfeedback trials. Auditory feedback based on sonification of the movement error was not practical for training the 3-dimensional movement for most participants. Concurrent multimodal feedback in combination with terminal feedback may be most effective, especially if the feedback strategy is adapted to individual preferences and skill level. ABSTRACT. Augmented feedback, provided by coaches or displays, is a well-established strategy to accelerate motor learning. Frequent terminal feedback and concurrent feedback have been shown to be detrimental for simple motor task learning but supportive for complex motor task learning. However, conclusions on optimal feedback strategies have been mainly drawn from studies on artificial laboratory tasks with visual feedback only. Therefore, the authors compared the effectiveness of learning a complex, 3-dimensional rowing-type task with either concurrent visual, auditory, or haptic feedback to self-controlled terminal visual feedback. Results revealed that terminal visual feedback was most effective because it emphasized the internalization of task-relevant aspects. In contrast, concurrent feedback fostered the correction of taskirrelevant errors, which hindered learning. The concurrent visual and haptic feedback group performed much better during training with the feedback than in nonfeedback trials. Auditory feedback based on sonification of the movement error was not practical for training the 3-dimensional movement for most participants. Concurrent multimodal feedback in combination with terminal feedback may be most effective, especially if the feedback strategy is adapted to individual preferences and skill level.

Sonification as Concurrent Augmented Feedback for Motor Skill Learning and the Importance of Mapping Design

“…Although it is known that given clever sound design, several streams of sonic information can be disassociated from each other and attended to simultaneously [36,45], the task of integrating them with the corresponding dimensions of motor performance could represent a cognitive drain of the same manner described by Kovacs et al in the domain of vision. Multidimensional movement error sonification runs this risk highly, as demonstrated by Sigrist et al [30].…”

“…The state of the literature makes it difficult (at this point) to assess the suitability of sonification as concurrent augmented feedback for a novel task or skill to be trained. If a given experiment (such as Sigrist et al, [30], which sonified multidimensional error in a rowing task) shows that learners perform worse under sonification conditions than when using feedback in other modalities, it does not tell us that sonification is less effective than these other options as a general rule. It does not even tell us that sonification is less effective or appropriate to use as feedback for this particular task.…”

“…Controlled assessments of its effectiveness are rare, and do not always provide clear recommendations for future implementation. For example, Sigrist et al [30] reviewed three modalities of feedback (visual auditory and haptic) in an attempt to probe how general principles such as the guidance effect compare on the same task. A clear problem however, emerged in the auditory condition.…”

“…Sigrist et al [30] examined task learning with concurrent augmented feedback presented in three separate modalities: visual, auditory and haptic. Participants were required to practice a rowing activity in a simulator with feedback provided on alternate trials i.e.…”

A Survey of Multimodal Systems and Techniques for Motor Learning

“…For example, consider "pacing" or "temporal feedback" as a category. A system can, for instance, use rhythmic tones or music to guide the pace during an attempt [83], then use a haptic metronome [84] to guide pacing between attempts, and visually give terminal feedback on pacing at the end of a session in the form of a report or score [85]. In this manner, all modalities have been assigned to the same area of information on motor performance, but their delivery is ordered in different timing frequencies.…”