Effect of Verbal Instruction on Motor Learning Ability of Anaerobic and Explosive Exercises in Physical Education University Students

Feedback for Promoting Motor Skill Learning in Physical Education: A Trial Sequential Meta-Analysis

Feedback can be used as an effective teaching method in physical education (PE) to promote students' learning of motor skills. However, there is no objective synthetic evidence to support the role of feedback in PE. Additionally, the effect of each feedback subtype on students' motor skill learning is still unclear. This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) to evaluate the effects of feedback and feedback subtypes on students' motor skill learning. Nine databases were searched through September 2022 to identify appropriate literature. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 software and TSA was performed using TSA version 0.9.5.10 beta software. Fifteen studies were included. Feedback significantly improved students' motor skill learning in PE (SMD 0.47; 95% CI 0.01, 0.93; Z = 2.02; p = 0.04). The TSA confirmed the result of the meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses showed that the subtypes of feedback, including visual feedback, visual combined verbal feedback, visual self-model, visual expert model, corrective feedback, and teacher-regulated feedback, significantly improved students' learning of motor skills. In contrast, verbal, evaluative, and informational feedback did not produce changes in motor skill learning. Both complex and simple motor skills were improved by feedback. The use of feedback in PE benefits motor skill learning, regardless of whether the motor skills are complex or simple.

Effects of Contextual Interference on Learning of Falling Techniques

The main aim of this investigation was to determine the effect of high contextual interference (HCI) and low contextual interference (LCI) on motor learning of falling techniques. Thirty-five kinesiology students (21 males and 14 females; mean ± SD, age = 19.4 ± 0.69 years) were randomly assigned to the HCI or LCI practice group. The participants' task was to learn two judo falling techniques on both sides over 3 weeks. The two-way analysis of variance found no difference between LCI and HCI in the performance at the pretest, posttest, retention, and transfer. Both groups improved posttest and retention performance. Finally, differences were found for both groups between the falling performance in the posttest and the application test (except for the right yoko ukemi fall in the HCI). Lower application test scores led to the conclusion that the 3-week treatment was insufficient to reach the application level of the falling techniques.