Contextual Interference in Motor Learning: Dissociated Effects Due to the Nature of Task Variations

1992 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 627-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy D. Lee ◽  
Gabriele Wulf ◽  
Richard A. Schmidt

The contextual interference effect in motor learning refers to the interference that results from practising a task within the concept of other tasks in a practice session. Several studies have shown that practice under conditions of high contextual interference (i.e. with a random practice order) degrades performance during acquisition trials, compared to low contextual interference conditions (i.e. with a blocked order, where practice is completed on one task before practice on another task is undertaken). In contrast to acquisition performance, random practice usually leads to more effective learning than blocked practice, as measured by retention and transfer tests. One of the hypotheses regarding the effect suggests that a random practice schedule induces more extensive planning operations during practice than a blocked practice condition. If so, then differences between these two conditions should emerge to the degree that the set of tasks requires complete reconstruction of these planning operations on each trial. To address this issue, we compared four groups of subjects: a blocked and random group that practised three timing tasks that shared a common characteristic (same relative timing), and a blocked and random group that practised three tasks that each had different relative timing structures. Subjects practised these tasks on each of two days, with a retention test and two transfer tests that required either a relative timing structure that had been practised previously or had not previously been practised. No random/ blocked differences occurred regardless of the relative timing of the patterns during acquisition or retention. However, for both transfer tests, random practice enhanced learning only for the group that had practised with tasks that each had different relative timing during acquisition. Implications of these results for an explanation of contextual interference are discussed.

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina G.T.X. de Souza ◽  
Marcelo E.S. Nunes ◽  
Umberto C. Corrêa ◽  
Suely dos Santos

AbstractPurpose. The aim of this study was to investigate the contextual interference effect on learning a sport-related task in older adults. Methods. We selected 40 physically active individuals aged 65-80 years that were randomly divided into random and blocked practice groups. The task comprised throwing a bocce ball to three targets at distances of 2, 4 and 6 m. Practice consisted of 120 trials divided into two sessions. Two retention tests at a distance of 4 m were conducted (post-10 min and 24 h) and then two transfer tests with a target at 5 m (post-24 h) were performed with the preferred and non-preferred hand. Task performance and movement patterns were measured. Results. Comparisons between the practice groups revealed no contextual interference effect (p > 0.05); the random group showed improved performance during practice (p < 0.05) but the blocked group did not. Overall, the results showed similar performance between the groups in the retention and transfer tests, although it was inferred that the blocked group made insufficient corrective adjustments. Conclusions. It was concluded that contextual interference did not affect the learning of a sport-based skill in older adults. Nonetheless, it can be argued that the parameter modifications may have negatively influenced learning this task by the practice groups and/or they may have required more practice time.


2008 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 407-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic A. Simon ◽  
Timothy D. Lee ◽  
John D. Cullen

Learners ( n = 48) practiced three multisegment movements with distinct target movement times. Four practice groups were compared: blocked, random, and two groups who had a win-shift/lose-stay schedule (WSLS1 and WSLS2). For these latter groups switching between practice tasks was performance-contingent: within 5% of target time for 1 or 2 consecutive trials, respectively. During acquisition, blocked performance was more accurate than for both random and WSLS2 groups. The WSLS1 group performed between blocked and random groups, but did not differ from either. In a next-day retention test, the random group scored better than the blocked group. The WSLS1 group performed similarly to the random practice while the WSLS2 group's scores were similar to those of the blocked group. Results encourage further study of similar practice schedules.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristy V. Dang ◽  
Darius E. Parvin ◽  
Richard B. Ivry

AbstractThe classic advice given to anyone learning a new skill is “practice makes perfect.” While this provides a good general rule to follow, it lacks any detail on what form of practice will efficiently maximize learning. So when faced with the task of acquiring multiple skills, what is the optimal way to learn? Would it be more beneficial to master each skill separately or learn them all at once in an interleaved fashion? A concept known as contextual interference suggests that using a random practice schedule leads to better retention than a blocked one. There are some motor learning studies that are consistent with this hypothesis and some that are not. In order to explore these conflicting results, we applied contextual interference to a simple reaching task that could allow us to observe its effects to various components of motor learning. We had participants learn three different visuomotor rotations and manipulated interference by placing them in groups characterized by how training targets are ordered (blocked vs. random). Using reaction time and hand angle as our measures of performance, we found that participants who experienced a random practice schedule had significant improvements in their ability to retain information, which was manifest as higher levels of implicit adaptation and faster reaction times. However, this did not necessarily mean the information was executed accurately since hand angles did not differ between groups. These findings suggest contextual interference will be most advantageous in situations that require fast explicit recall of a motor plan to use rather than those that emphasize accuracy.


2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (11) ◽  
pp. 1854-1871 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily S. Cross ◽  
Paul J. Schmitt ◽  
Scott T. Grafton

When individuals acquire new skills, initial performance is typically better and tasks are judged to be easier when the tasks are segregated and practiced by block, compared to when different tasks are randomly intermixed in practice. However, subsequent skill retention is better for a randomly practiced group, an effect known as contextual interference (CI). The present study examined the neural substrates of CI using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Individuals learned a set of three 4-element sequences with the left hand according to a block or random practice schedule. Behavioral retest for skill retention confirmed the presence of a typical CI effect with the random group outperforming the block group. Using a go/no-go fMRI paradigm, sequence preparation during the premovement study period was separated from movement execution. Imaging data for the two groups were compared for the first 1/3 and final 1/3 of training trials. Toward the end of training, behavioral performance between the two groups was similar, although the random group would later display a performance advantage on retention testing. During study time, the random group showed greater activity in sensorimotor and premotor regions compared to the block group. These areas are associated with motor preparation, sequencing, and response selection. This pattern of recruitment is consistent with the hypothesis that CI benefits in a sequencing task are due to improved capacity to actively prepare motor responses.


1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 487-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Pollatou ◽  
E. Kioumourtzoglou ◽  
N. Agelousis ◽  
G. Mavromatis

The present study investigated the generalizability of contextual interference effects by extending previous laboratory and field research to novel movements controlled by different motor programs. 30 men and 33 women learned novel throwing and kicking tasks, practicing with blocked, serial, or random schedules. The subjects practiced the tasks four days a week for two weeks and then were given a postest. One week later subjects were given a retention test. Significant improvements in performance were found for all groups for both tasks; however, a significant effect for practice condition was found only for the throwing task during retention, for which the random practice schedule led to better learning than the blocked and the serial practice. These findings suggest that the blocked, serial, and random practice methods could be effectively used for tasks controlled by different motor programs but must be practiced in the same teaching session, without expecting one to be more effective in learning than any other.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Meysam Beik ◽  
Hamidreza Taheri ◽  
Alireza Saberi Kakhki ◽  
Majid Ghoshuni

2018 ◽  
Vol 182 ◽  
pp. 55-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Kim ◽  
J. Chen ◽  
W.B. Verwey ◽  
D.L. Wright

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1092-1101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will F.W. Wu ◽  
Doug E. Young ◽  
Steven L. Schandler ◽  
Gily Meir ◽  
Rachel L.M. Judy ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document