The Effect of Choice on Motor Learning for Learners With Different Levels of Intrinsic Motivation

OPTIMAL theory's claims about motivation lack evidence in the motor learning literature

Motivation is commonly recognized by researchers and practitioners as a key factor for motor learning. The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) claims that practice conditions that enhance learners' expectancies for future successful outcomes or that are autonomy supportive are motivating, thus leading to better learning. To examine the current evidence of the association between motivation and motor learning, we searched the literature for studies that manipulated expectancies and/or autonomy support. Specifically, our goals were to assess whether these manipulations resulted in group differences in motivation and, if so, whether increased motivation was associated with learning advantages. Results showed that out of 166 experiments, only 21% (n = 35) included at least one measure of motivation, even though this is the main factor proposed by OPTIMAL theory to explain the learning benefits of these manipulations. Among those, only 23% (n = 8) found group-level effects on motivation, suggesting that these manipulations might not be as motivating as expected. Of the eight experiments that found a group-level effect on motivation, five also observed learning benefits, offering limited evidence that when practice conditions increase motivation, learning is more likely to occur. Overall, the small number of studies assessing motivation precludes any reliable conclusions on the association between motivation and motor learning from being drawn. Together, our results question whether manipulations implemented in the research lines supporting OPTIMAL theory are indeed motivating and highlight the lack of sufficient evidence in these literatures to support that increased motivation benefits motor learning.

Differential performance on a motor task according to the preference for task-irrelevant elements that are chosen or assigned: A randomized controlled study

This study explored the impact of choice and preference for what is chosen or assigned on performance on a motor task. Using an experimental design with a dart-throwing task, 90 novice participants were randomized into four groups: Choice-Like condition, Choice-Dislike condition, Assigned-Like condition, and Assigned-Dislike condition, resulting of the manipulation of choice (vs. assignation) of a task-irrelevant element and preference (irrelevant element: darts color and design). The study found that participants who were given the opportunity to choose their own dart for a throwing task performed better than those who were not given the choice. Participants who threw a dart they preferred also had better scores than those who threw a dart they did not like. However, the interactive effects of choice and preference on performance were inconclusive, and whereas being assigned with a disliked element was the worst condition for performance, and being allowed to choose preferred elements the most facilitatory one, nothing else can be concluded on the impact of both conditions alone or in combination. These results suggest that both choice and preference can positively impact performance in closed motor learning tasks and have practical applications for training and execution in athletic performance. Further investigations are warranted to delve into the interplay of choice and preference in diverse contexts and populations.

Either Autonomy Support or Enhanced Expectancies Delivered Via Virtual-Reality Benefits Frontal-Plane Single-Leg Squatting Kinematics

Our purpose in this study was to determine the effects of a virtual reality intervention delivering specific motivational motor learning manipulations of either autonomy support (AS) or enhanced expectancies (EE) on frontal plane single-leg squatting kinematics. We allocated 45 participants (21 male, 24 female) demonstrating knee, hip, and trunk frontal plane mechanics associated with elevated anterior cruciate ligament injury risk to one of three groups (control, AS, or EE). Participants mimicked an avatar performing five sets of eight repetitions of exemplary single-leg squats. AS participants were given the added option of choosing the color of their avatar. EE participants received real-time biofeedback in the form of green highlights on the avatar that remained on as long as the participant maintained pre-determined 'safe' frontal plane mechanics. We measured peak frontal plane knee, hip, and trunk angles before (baseline) and immediately following (post) the intervention. The control group demonstrated greater increases in knee abduction angle (Δ = +2.3°) than did the AS (Δ = +0.1°) and EE groups (Δ = -0.4°) (p = .003; η2p = .28). All groups demonstrated increased peak hip adduction (p = .01, ηp2 = .18) (control Δ = +1.5°; AS Δ = +3.2°; EE Δ = +0.7°). Hip adduction worsened in all groups. AS and EE motivation strategies appeared to mitigate maladaptive frontal plane knee mechanics.

How to improve movement execution in sidestep cutting? Involve me and I will learn

Providing choices, i.e., autonomy, to athletes during practice increases intrinsic motivation and positively influences the motor learning process. The effects of autonomy on the timing of feedback (self-controlled timing of feedback) when optimizing the movement execution of sidestep cutting (SSC), a task that is highly related with ACL injury risk, are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of self-controlled timing of video and EF-feedback on movement execution of SSC in team sport athletes. Thirty healthy ball team sport athletes (22.9 ± 1.7 years, 185.5 ± 7.2 cm, 79.3 ± 9.2 kg) were recruited from local sports clubs. Participants were alternately assigned to the self-control (SC) or the yoked (YK) group based on arrival and performed five anticipated and five unanticipated 45° SSC trials as pre-, immediate-post and one-week retention test. Movement execution was measured with the Cutting Movement Assessment Score (CMAS). Training consisted of three randomized 45° SSC conditions: one anticipated and two unanticipated conditions. All participants received expert video instructions and were instructed to 'try to do your best in copying the movement of the expert'. The SC group was allowed to request feedback whenever they wanted during training. The feedback consisted of 1) CMAS score, 2) posterior and sagittal videos of the last trial and 3) an external focus verbal cue on how to improve their execution. The participants were told to lower their score and they knew the lower the score, the better. The YK group received feedback after the same trial on which their matched participant in the SC group had requested feedback. Data of twenty-two participants (50% in SC group) was analyzed. Pre-test and training CMAS scores between groups were equal (p > 0.05). In the anticipated condition, the SC group (1.7 ± 0.9) had better CMAS scores than the YK group (2.4 ± 1.1) at the retention test (p < 0.001). Additionally, in the anticipated condition, the SC group showed improved movement execution during immediate-post (2.0 ± 1.1) compared to pre-test (3.0 ± 1.0), which was maintained during retention (p < 0.001). The YK group also improved in the anticipated condition during immediate-post (1.8 ± 1.1) compared to pre-test (2.6 ± 1.0) (p < 0.001) but showed decreased movement execution during retention compared to immediate-post test (p = 0.001). In conclusion, self-controlled timing of feedback resulted in better learning and greater improvements in movement execution compared to the control group in the anticipated condition. Self-controlled timing of feedback seems beneficial in optimizing movement execution in SSC and is advised to be implemented in ACL injury prevention programs.

Immersive Real-Time Biofeedback Optimized With Enhanced Expectancies Improves Motor Learning: A Feasibility Study

CONTEXT

An Optimizing Performance through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning theory-based motor learning intervention delivering autonomy support and enhanced expectancies (EE) shows promise for reducing cognitive-motor dual-task costs, or the relative difference in primary task performance when completed with and without a secondary cognitive task, that facilitate adaptive injury-resistant movement response. The current pilot study sought to determine the effectiveness of an autonomy support versus an EE-enhanced virtual reality motor learning intervention to reduce dual-task costs during single-leg balance.

DESIGN

Within-subjects 3 × 3 trial.

METHODS

Twenty-one male and 24 female participants, between the ages of 18 and 30 years, with no history of concussion, vertigo, lower-extremity surgery, or lower-extremity injuries the previous 6 months, were recruited for training sessions on consecutive days. Training consisted of 5 × 8 single-leg squats on each leg, during which all participants mimicked an avatar through virtual reality goggles. The autonomy support group chose an avatar color, and the EE group received positive kinematic biofeedback. Baseline, immediate, and delayed retention testing consisted of single-leg balancing under single- and dual-task conditions. Mixed-model analysis of variances compared dual-task costs for center of pressure velocity and SD between groups on each limb.

RESULTS

On the right side, dual-task costs for anterior-posterior center of pressure mean and SD were reduced in the EE group (mean Δ = -51.40, Cohen d = 0.80 and SD Δ = -66.00%, Cohen d = 0.88) compared with the control group (mean Δ = -22.09, Cohen d = 0.33 and SD Δ = -36.10%, Cohen d = 0.68) from baseline to immediate retention.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that EE strategies that can be easily implemented in a clinic or sport setting may be superior to task-irrelevant AS approaches for influencing injury-resistant movement adaptations.