Our aim in this study was to examine, via technical performance analysis and speed of execution, whether information processing and technical knowledge help explain learning benefits of self-controlled video feedback in children’s weightlifting performance. We randomized 24 children (aged 10 to 12 years) into self-controlled (SC) and yoked (YK) feedback groups. Learners underwent test sessions one week before (pre-test) and one day after (post-test) six weightlifting training sessions. During each test session, we recorded kinematic parameters of snatch performance using Kinovea version 0.8.15 software. After the learning sessions, the SC group improved on most kinematic parameters (e.g., the horizontal displacement of the bar between the first and the second pulls [MDXV = 25.42%, SD = 18.96, p = 0.003) and the maximum height reached by the bar (MHMV = 5.51%, SD = 7.71, p < 0.05)], while the YK group improved only on the DxV (MDXV = 19.08%, SD = 24.68, p < 0.05). In addition, the SC group showed a more advanced phase of cognitive processing compared to the YK group, and the SC group showed a superior improvement in their technical knowledge level (p < 0.001) compared to the YK group (p < 0.05). Thus, key elements to correcting motor errors in children’s weightlifting through self-controlled feedback were improvements in information processing and technical knowledge.
AikenC. A.FairbrotherJ. T.PostP. G. (2012).
The effects of self-controlled video feedback on the learning of the basketball set shot. Frontiers in Psychology,
3, 338.
2.
AndrieuxM.DannaJ.ThonB. (2012).
Self-control of task difficulty during training enhances motor learning of a complex coincidence-anticipation task. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
83(1), 27–35.
3.
BarrosJ. A.YanthaZ. D.CarterM. J.HussienJ.Ste-MarieD. M. (2019).
Examining the impact of error estimation on the effects of self-controlled feedback. Human Movement Science,
63, 182–198.
4.
BotvinickM. M.BraverT. S.BarchD. M.CarterC. S.CohenJ. D. (2001).
Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review,
108(3), 624–652.
5.
BrownsteinC. G.BallD.MicklewrightD.GibsonN. V. (2018).
The effect of maturation on performance during repeated sprints with self-selected versus standardized recovery intervals in youth footballers. Pediatric Exercise Science,
30(4), 500–505.
6.
BrydgesR.CarnahanH.RoseD.RoseL.DubrowskiA. (2010).
Coordinating progressive levels of simulation fidelity to maximize educational benefit. Academic Medicine,
8 (5(5), 806–812.
7.
CarterC. S.BraverT. S.BarchD. M.BotvinickM. M.NollD.CohenJ. D. (1998).
Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science (New York, N.Y.),
280(5364), 747–749.
8.
CarterM. J.PattersonJ. T. (2012).
Self-controlled knowledge of results: Age-related differences in motor learning, strategies, and error detection. Human Movement Science,
31(6), 1459–1472.
9.
CarterM. J.Ste-MarieD. M. (2017).
An interpolated activity during the knowledge-of-results delay interval eliminates the learning advantages of self-controlled feedback schedules. Psychological Research,
81(2), 399–406.
10.
CeccariniF.CastielloU. (2018).
The grasping side of post-error slowing. Cognition,
179, 1–13.
11.
ChiviacowskyS.de MedeirosF. L.KaeferA.WallyR.WulfG. (2008).
Self-controlled feedback in 10-year-old children: Higher feedback frequencies enhance learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
79(1), 122–127.
12.
ChiviacowskyS.WulfG. (2005).
Self-controlled feedback is effective if it is based on the learner's performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
76(1), 42–48.
13.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd., pp. 19–74).
Routledge.
14.
DebenerS.UllspergerM.SiegelM.FiehlerK.Von CramonD. Y.EngelA. K. (2005).
Trial-by-trial coupling of concurrent electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging identifies the dynamics of performance monitoring. Journal of Neuroscience,
25(50), 11730–11737.
15.
DeLongM. R.StrickP. L. (1974).
Relation of basal ganglia, cerebellum, and motor cortex units to ramp and ballistic limb movements. Brain Research,
71(2-3), 327–335.
16.
FittsP. M. (1954).
The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology,
47(6), 381–391.
17.
GourgoulisV.AggelousisN.MavromatisG.GarasA. (2000).
Three-dimensional kinematic analysis of the snatch of elite Greek weightlifters. Journal of Sports Sciences,
18(8), 643–652.
18.
GrandK. F.BruziA. T.DykeF. B.GodwinM. M.LeikerA. M.ThompsonA. G.BuchananT. L.MillerM. W. (2015).
Why self-controlled feedback enhances motor learning: Answers from electroencephalography and indices of motivation. Human Movement Science,
43, 23–32.
19.
HoL. K.LorenzenC.WilsonC. J.SaundersJ. E.WilliamsM. D. (2014).
Reviewing current knowledge in snatch performance and technique: The need for future directions in applied research. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
28(2), 574–586.
20.
HooverD. L.CarlsonK. M.ChristensenB. K.ZebasC. J. (2006).
Biomechanical analysis of women weightlifters during the snatch. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
20(3), 627.
21.
JanelleC. M.BarbaD. A.FrehlichS. G.TennantL. K.CauraughJ. 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.
22.
JueptnerM.WeillerC. (1998).
A review of differences between basal ganglia and cerebellar control of movements as revealed by functional imaging studies. Brain,
121(8), 1437–1449.
23.
KoedijkerJ. M.PooltonJ. M.MaxwellJ. P.OudejansR. R.BeekP. J.MastersR. S. (2011).
Attention and time constraints in perceptual-motor learning and performance: Instruction, analogy, and skill level. Consciousness and Cognition,
20(2), 245–256.
24.
KrajenbrinkH.van AbswoudeF.VermeulenS.van CappellenS.SteenbergenB. (2018).
Motor learning and movement automatization in typically developing children: The role of instructions with an external or internal focus of attention. Human Movement Science,
60, 183–190.
25.
KrauseD.AgethenM.ZobeC. (2018).
Error feedback frequency affects automaticity but not accuracy and consistency after extensive motor skill practice. Journal of Motor Behavior,
50(2), 144–154.
26.
MarquesP. G.WalterC.TaniG.CorrêaU. C. (2014).
The effect of self-goal setting on the acquisition of a motor skill. Motricidade,
10(4), 56–63.
27.
MilaneseC.CavedonV.CorteS.AgostiniT. (2017).
The effects of two different correction strategies on the snatch technique in weightlifting. Journal of Sports Sciences,
35(5), 476–483.
28.
PostP. G.AikenC. A.LaughlinD. D.FairbrotherJ. T. (2016).
Self-control over combined video feedback and modeling facilitates motor learning. Human Movement Science,
47, 49–59.
29.
PostP. G.FairbrotherJ. T.BarrosJ. A. (2011).
Self-controlled amount of practice benefits learning of a motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
82(3), 474–481.
30.
PostP. G.FairbrotherJ. T.BarrosJ. A.KulpaJ. D. (2014).
Self-controlled practice within a fixed time period facilitates the learning of a basketball set shot. Journal of Motor Learning and Development,
2(1), 9–15.
31.
RabbittP. (1969).
Psychological refractory delay and response-stimulus interval duration in serial, choice-response tasks. Acta Psychologica,
30, 195–219.
32.
RabbittP. M. (1966).
Errors and error correction in choice-response tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology,
71(2), 264–272.
33.
SanliE. A.PattersonJ. T.BrayS. R.LeeT. D. (2013).
Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the self-determination theory. Frontiers in Psychology,
3, 611.
34.
SibleyB. A.EtnierJ. L. (2003).
The relationship between physical activity and cognition in children: A meta-analysis. Pediatric Exercise Science,
15(3), 243–256.
35.
SouissiM. A.ElghoulY.SouissiH.MasmoudiL.AmmarA.ChtourouH.SouissiN. (2020).
The effects of three correction strategies of errors on the snatch technique in 10-12-year-old children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, Publish Ahead of Print
36.
Ste-MarieD. M.CarterM. J.LawB.VertesK.SmithV. (2015).
Bénéfices de l'apprentissage auto-contrôlé: Explorer les contributions de l'auto-efficacité et de la motivation intrinsèque via l'analyse de chemin [Benefits of self-controlled learning: Exploring the contributions of self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation through path analysis]. Journal of Sports Sciences,
34(17), 1–7.
37.
TannerJ. M. (1981).
Growth and maturation during adolescence. Nutrition Reviews,
39(2), 43–55.
38.
TsaiM. J.JwoH. (2015).
Controlling absolute frequency of feedback in a self-controlled situation enhances motor learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
121(3), 746–758.
39.
WulfG. (2007).
Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: Implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy,
93(2), 96–101.
40.
WulfG.LewthwaiteR. (2016).
Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
23(5), 1382–1414.
