Effects of Proactive Interference on Learning the Tennis Backhand Stroke

Abstract

Proactive interference in motor skill acquisition occurs when a desired response is adversely affected by a previously learned skill. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of learning a forehand tennis groundstroke on the subsequent learning of a backhand. 96 subjects equally representing seventh and eighth grade boys and girls who had never played tennis were randomly assigned to two methods of instruction. This resulted in four groups of 24. The experimental groups received instruction and practice in a forehand skill. The experimental and control groups received backhand instruction and practice and both groups were tested on backhand. Results of a 2 × 2 multivariate analysis of variance indicated significant between-subjects main effects for sex and groups. There were significant within-subjects effects for days and group × days. These results suggest that learning the forehand independent of the backhand may interfere with learning the backhand.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Birnbaum

I. M.

(1970) Response selection and retroactive inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 85, 406–410.

Craik

F. I. M.

Birtwistle

(1971) Proactive inhibition in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 91, 120–123.

Fleishman

E. A.

(1972) On the relationship between abilities, learning, and human performance. American Psychologist, 27, 1017–1032.

Hill

W. F.

(1963) Learning: a survey of psychological interpretations. Scranton, PA: Chandler. Pp. 1–10.

Kerr

B. A.

(1970) Weight and velocity influences on kinesthetic learning and transfer of learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 2, 195–202.

Laslo

J. I.

Pritchard

S. A.

(1969) Transfer variables in tracking skills. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1, 317–328.

Lersten

K. C.

(1968) Transfer of movement components in a motor learning task. Research Quarterly, 39, 575–581.

Lewis

McAllister

D. E.

Adams

J. A.

(1951) Facilitation and interference in performance of the modified Mashburn apparatus: I. The effects of varying the amount of original learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 247–260.

Lewis

Smith

McAllister

D. E.

(1952) Retroactive facilitation and interference in performance on the two-hand coordinator. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44, 44–50.

10.

Magill

R. A.

(1985) Motor learning: concepts and applications. (2nd ed.) Dubuque, IA: Brown.

11.

Naylor

J. C.

Briggs

G. E.

(1963) Effects of task complexity and task organization on relative efficiency of part and whole training methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 217–224.

12.

Osgood

C. E.

(1949) The similarity paradox in human learning. Psychological Review, 56, 132–143.

13.

Ross

I. D.

(1974) Interference in discrete motor tasks: a test of the theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

14.

Schmidt

R. A.

(1988) Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. (2nd ed.) Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

15.

Schmidt

R. A.

Young

D. E.

(1987) Transfer of movement control in motor skill learning. In Cormier

S. M.

Hagman

J. D.

(Eds.), Transfer of learning: contemporary research and application. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Pp. 47–79.

16.

Shapiro

D. C.

(1978) The learning of generalized motor programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

17.

Warren

(1974) An analysis of proactive inhibition in a cued recall task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 131–138.