The contextual interference effect (random practice yields better transfer and retention compared to blocked practice) detected in a study of 24 boys and 33 girls randomly selected (M age = 10.5 yr., SD = .6) performing a linear positioning motor task seemed to dissipate in extended transfer trials.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BattigW. F. (1972) A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 111–149.
2.
BradyF. (1998) A theoretical and empirical review of the contextual interference effect and the learning of motor skills. Quest, 50, 266–293.
3.
HallK.MagillR. A. (1995) Variability of practice and contextual interference in motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 299–309.
4.
LeeT. D.MagillR. A. (1983) Examining the specificity of practice hypothesis: is learning modality specific?Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72, 345–354.
5.
MagillR. A.HallK. (1990) A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241–289.
6.
MeiraC. M.Jr.TaniG. (2001) The contextual interference effect in acquisition of dart-throwing skill tested on a transfer test with extended trials. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92, 910–918.
7.
MeiraC. M.Jr.TaniG. (in press) Contextual interference effects assessed by extended transfer trials in the acquisition of the volleyball serve. Journal of Human Movement Studies.
8.
SheaJ. B.MorganR. L. (1979) Specificity and variability of practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61(2), 169–177.
9.
WulfG.LeeT. D. (1995) Contextual interference in movements of the same class: differential effects on program and parameter learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 25, 254–263.
