Volume 3, Issue 3 (8-2021)                   IJMCL 2021, 3(3): 22-32 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Arsham S, Sarabandi M, Ghanaatian F. The Effect of Instructional Language Types on Perceived Choice, and the Learning of a Sports Skill. IJMCL. 2021; 3 (3) :22-32
URL: http://ijmcl.com/article-1-81-en.html
Assistant Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (311 Views)
Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of instructional language types on Perceived Choice, and the learning of darts throwing skill.
Methods: Forty-eight female students were randomly divided into three instructional language groups (autonomy-supportive, controlling, neutral). All groups watched a silent clip about darts throwing and subsequently performed 51 throws as their pre-test. On the second day, each group watched a specific clip prepared for them and then performed 51 throws as their post-test. The second clip provided learners with different degrees of choice or control in performing the task. All participants completed choice subscale questions from the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory by McAuley et al. (1991) before the pre-test and after the post-tests.
Results: The results revealed that the instructional language used in the autonomy-supportive group facilitated learning significantly in this group.
Conclusion: Teachers must try to provide situations that promote learners' sense of competence and Autonomy which in turn, improves learning.
Full-Text [PDF 450 kb]   (255 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: 1. Motor learning
Received: 2021/04/16 | Accepted: 2021/07/8 | Published: 2021/08/31

1. Bernardi, G., Ricciardi, E., Sani, L., Gaglianese, A., Papasogli, A., Ceccarelli, R., Franzoni, F., Galetta, F., Santoro, G., & Goebel, R. (2013). How skill expertise shapes the brain functional architecture: an fMRI study of visuo-spatial and motor processing in professional racing-car and naïve drivers. PloS one, 8(10), e77764. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0077764]
2. Buckner, R. L. (2012). The serendipitous discovery of the brain's default network. Neuroimage, 62(2), 1137-1145. [DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.035]
3. Chen, D., & Singer, R. N. (1992). Self-regulation and cognitive strategies in sport participation. International Journal of Sport Psychology.
4. Chua, L.-K., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2018). Onward and upward: Optimizing motor performance. Human Movement Science, 60, 107-114. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2018.05.006]
5. De Muynck, G.-J., Vansteenkiste, M., Delrue, J., Aelterman, N., Haerens, L., & Soenens, B. (2017). The effects of feedback valence and style on need satisfaction, self-talk, and perseverance among tennis players: An experimental study. Journal of sport and exercise psychology, 39(1), 67-80. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.2015-0326]
6. Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of educational Psychology, 73(5), 642. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.73.5.642]
7. Edwards, W. H. (2010). Motor learning and control: From theory to practice. Cengage Learning.
8. Hancock, G. R., Butler, M. S., & Fischman, M. G. (1995). On the problem of two-dimensional error scores: Measures and analyses of accuracy, bias, and consistency. Journal of motor behavior, 27(3), 241-250. [DOI:10.1080/00222895.1995.9941714]
9. Hooyman, A., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2014). Impacts of autonomy-supportive versus controlling instructional language on motor learning. Human Movement Science, 36, 190-198. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2014.04.005]
10. Iwatsuki, T., Abdollahipour, R., Psotta, R., Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2017). Autonomy facilitates repeated maximum force productions. Human Movement Science, 55, 264-268. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2017.08.016]
11. Janelle, C. M., Barba, D. A., Frehlich, S. G., Tennant, L. K., & Cauraugh, J. H. (1997). Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 68(4), 269-279. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.1997.10608008]
12. Kim, W., Chang, Y., Kim, J., Seo, J., Ryu, K., Lee, E., Woo, M., & Janelle, C. M. (2014). An fMRI study of differences in brain activity among elite, expert, and novice archers at the moment of optimal aiming. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 27(4), 173-182. [DOI:10.1097/WNN.0000000000000042]
13. Kühn, A. A., Brücke, C., Hübl, J., Schneider, G.-H., Kupsch, A., Eusebio, A., Ashkan, K., Holland, P., Aziz, T., & Vandenberghe, W. (2008). Motivation modulates motor-related feedback activity in the human basal ganglia. Current Biology, 18(15), R648-R650. [DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2008.06.003]
14. Leiker, A. M., Bruzi, A. T., Miller, M. W., Nelson, M., Wegman, R., & Lohse, K. R. (2016). The effects of autonomous difficulty selection on engagement, motivation, and learning in a motion-controlled video game task. Human Movement Science, 49, 326-335. [DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2016.08.005]
15. Lemos, A., Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2017). Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 31, 28-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.03.009]
16. Lewthwaite, R., Chiviacowsky, S., Drews, R., & Wulf, G. (2015). Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 22(5), 1383-1388. [DOI:10.3758/s13423-015-0814-7]
17. Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2012). 10 Motor learning through a motivational lens. Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory and practice, 173.
18. Li, G., He, H., Huang, M., Zhang, X., Lu, J., Lai, Y., Luo, C., & Yao, D. (2015). Identifying enhanced cortico-basal ganglia loops associated with prolonged dance training. Scientific reports, 5(1), 1-11. [DOI:10.1038/srep10271]
19. Liu, D. L. J., Graham, S., & Zorawski, M. (2008). Enhanced selective memory consolidation following post-learning pleasant and aversive arousal. Neurobiology of learning and memory, 89(1), 36-46. [DOI:10.1016/j.nlm.2007.09.001]
20. McAuley, E., Wraith, S., & Duncan, T. E. (1991). Self‐Efficacy, Perceptions of Success, and Intrinsic Motivation for Exercise 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 21(2), 139-155. [DOI:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00493.x]
21. Patterson, J. T., Carter, M., & Sanli, E. (2011). Decreasing the proportion of self-control trials during the acquisition period does not compromise the learning advantages in a self-controlled context. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 82(4), 624-633. [DOI:10.1080/02701367.2011.10599799]
22. Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Cortisol reactivity to a teacher's motivating style: The biology of being controlled versus supporting autonomy. Motivation and Emotion, 35(1), 63-74. [DOI:10.1007/s11031-011-9204-2]
23. Sanli, E. A., Patterson, J. T., Bray, S. R., & Lee, T. D. (2013). Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the self-determination theory. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 611. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00611]
24. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological review, 115(2), 336. [DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336]
25. Sheldon, K. M., & Filak, V. (2008). Manipulating autonomy, competence, and relatedness support in a game‐learning context: New evidence that all three needs matter. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(2), 267-283. [DOI:10.1348/014466607X238797]
26. Su, Y.-L., & Reeve, J. (2011). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to support autonomy. Educational psychology review, 23(1), 159-188. [DOI:10.1007/s10648-010-9142-7]
27. Wulf, G. (2007). Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy, 93(2), 96-101. [DOI:10.1016/j.physio.2006.08.005]
28. Wulf, G., Iwatsuki, T., Machin, B., Kellogg, J., Copeland, C., & Lewthwaite, R. (2018). Lassoing skill through learner choice. Journal of motor behavior, 50(3), 285-292. [DOI:10.1080/00222895.2017.1341378]
29. Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 23(5), 1382-1414. [DOI:10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and Permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

© 2022 CC BY 4.0 | International Journal of Motor Control and Learning

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb