We tested a dyadic training protocol derived from cognitive and social theories of complex skill acquisition. Forty undergraduates practiced Space Fortress, a video game-like research tool, for 10 sessions of eight practice and two test games. Half of them practiced and tested alone; the others had identical tests but dyadic practice, in which they controlled part of each practice while being interlocked with a partner who controlled the rest. Subjects practiced both parts and their connections by alternating roles and by modeling their partners. Trainer time and resources were half for the dyadic group, and performance was equivalent. We discuss applied and basic implications of this 100% increase in training efficiency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, J. A., and Reynolds, B. (1954). Effects of shift in distribution of practice conditions following interpolated rest. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 32–36.
2.
Bimdura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
Carroll, W. R., and Bandura, A. (1990). Representational guidance of action production in observational learning: A causal analysis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 22, 85–97.
4.
Donchin, E. (1989). The learning strategies project: Introductory remarks. Acta Psychologica, 71, 1–15.
5.
Fabiani, M., Buckley, J., Gratton, G., Coles, M., Donchin, E., and Logie, R. (1989). The training of complex task performance. Acta Psychologica, 71, 259.
6.
Foss, M. A., Fabiani, M., Mane, A. M., and Donchin, E. (1989). Unsupervised practice: The performance of the control group. Acta Psychologica, 71, 23–54.
7.
Frederiksen, J. R., and White, B. Y. (1989). An approach to training based on principled task decomposition. Acta Psychologica, 71, 89–146.
8.
Gopher, D. (1990). The skill of attention control: Acquisilion and execution of attention strategies. In D. Meyer and S. Korenblom (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV (pp. 123–151). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9.
Gopher, D., Weil, M., and Siegel, D. (1989). Practice under changing priorities: An approach to the training of complex skills. Acta Psychologica, 71, 147–178.
10.
Kelley, C. R. (1969). Manual and automatic control. New York: Wiley.
11.
Lintern, G., and Gopher, D. (1978). Adaptive training of perceptual motor skills: Issues, results and future directions. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 10, 521–551.
12.
Logie, R., Baddeley, A., Mane, A., Donchin, E., and Russell, S. (1989). Working memory in the acquisition of complex cognitive skills. Acta Psychologica, 71, 53–87.
13.
Mane, A. M., Adams, J. A., and Donchin, E. (1989). Adaptive and part-whole training in the acquisition of a complex perceptual-motor skill. Acta Psychologica, 71, 179–196.
14.
Mane, A. M., and Donchin, E. (1989). The Space Fortress game. Acta Psychologica, 71, 17–22.
15.
Newell, K. M., Carlton, M. J., Fisher, A. T., and Rutter, B. G. (1989). Whole-part training strategies for learning the response dynamics of microprocessor-driven simulators. Acta Psychological, 71, 197–216.
16.
Schmidt, R. A. (1982). Motor learning and control: A behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
17.
Shapiro, D. C., and Schmidt, R. A. (1982). The schema theory: Recent evidence and developmental implications. In J. A. S. Kelso and J. E. Clark (Eds.), The development of movement control and coordination (pp. 113–150). New York: Wiley.
18.
Shea, C. H., Shebilske, W. L., Kohl, R. M., and Guadagnoli, M. A. (1991). After-contraction phenomenon: Influences on performance and learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 23, 51–62.
19.
Singer, R. N. (1980). Motor learning and human performance (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
20.
Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. P., and Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120–133.
21.
Stelmach, G. E. (1969). Efficiency of motor learning as a function of interpolated rest. Research Quarterly, 40, 198–202.
