適應性回饋的動作表現與學習效應：檢驗挑戰點假說

Abstract

適應性練習是依據學習者技能水準漸次提高工作難度的練習安排方式，本研究依此提供對應的回饋頻率，藉以檢驗挑戰點假說 (Guadagnoli& Lee, 2004) 之預測。本研究旨在檢驗適應性練習中，給予學習者適應性回饋的動作表現與學習效應。實驗參與者為41名成年人（22.4±3.1歲），隨機分派至50%回饋組、全部回饋組或適應性回饋組。實驗工作為三種不同工作難度的低手拋擲動作。學習者在獲得期依據表現漸次增加工作難度，並於15分鐘後與24小時後的立即保留測驗與延遲保留測驗試作。依變項是準確分數、獲得期試作次數與動作學習效率。在獲得期中，準確分數與試作次數，皆以混合設計二因子變異數分析比較其差異，其中工作難度為重複量數。立即與延遲保留測驗則以獨立樣本單因子變異數分析，檢驗準確分數與動作學習效率的差異。結果發現：（一）在獲得期中，工作難度的主要效果達顯著差異，但組間未達顯著差異；（二）在立即與延遲保留測驗中，組間的準確分數達顯著差異；（三）三組的動作學習效率達顯著差異。因此，本研究的結論是：（一）在適應性練習情況下，依工作難度逐漸的增加給予的適應性回饋，對立即的動作表現無影響；（二）適應性練習情況下，依工作難度逐漸的增加給予的適應性回饋有利於動作學習；（三）在適應性練習情況下，依工作難度逐漸的增加給予頻率的適應性回饋，其動作學習效率較優於固定的回饋頻率。Adaptive practice is a practice schedule that concerns learner’s skill level to increase task difficulty gradually. This study provided the frequency of feedback that match task difficulty to examine the predictions of Challenge Point Hypothesis (Guadagnoli& Lee, 2004). Propose of this study is to examine the motor performance and learning effects when provide learner adaptive feedback in the adaptive practice. Forty-one (22.4±3.1 years) adults served as participants and were randomly assigned into 50% feedback, all feedback, and adaptive feedback groups. The under hand throw task was utilized. In acquisition, task difficulty increasing as a function of learner’s performance. Fifteen minutes and twenty four hours later, 12 trails in immediate anddelayed retention tests were administered. Dependent variables were accuracy score, times of trails in acquisition, and efficiency of motor learning. For acquisition, accuracy score and times of trails in acquisition were analyzed by mixed design two-way ANOVA. For immediate and delayed retention tests, accuracy score and efficiency of motor learning were analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Results showed that (1) During acquisition phase, statistical significance were found on main effect of task difficulty, but not on groups; (2) Significant difference among three groups on accuracy score was found in immediate and delayed retention tests; and (3) Efficiency of motor learning were found significant difference among three groups. Thus, this study suggested that (1) Providing feedback increasing as a function of task difficulty in the adaptive practice doesn’t affect learner’s motor performance; (2) The adaptive feedback provided in adaptive practice is beneficial to motor learning; and (3) The efficiency of motor learning in practice condition, which providing adaptive feedback in adaptive practice, is better than practice condition which providing feedback with fixed frequency.