ECSS Paris 2023: OP-BM19
INTRODUCTION: Contextual interference (CI) (Battig, 1966) effect is claimed to enhance motor skill retention, though the general meta-analyses evinced that the beneficial effect of CI effect on retention is more conspicuous in adults and the elderly than in children (Brady, 2004; Czyż et al. 2024a, 2024b). Moreover, majority of the studies on adults and older adults were conducted in laboratory setting while studies on children in applied settings. To determine whether the presence of the CI effects in adults or lack in children is due to the age or setting issues we examined the interaction between practice schedule in childrens and older adults learning an aiming skill in applied settings. METHODS: A total of 96 participants (48 children, mean age 11.09 ± 1.01; 48 older adults, mean age 72.9 ± 4.98) were randomly assigned to Blocked or Random practice schedules with either 18 or 24 repetitions per session. Participants threw beanbags towards the circular target (Ávila et al., 2012; Chiviacowsky et al., 2008) from 3m, 4m, and 5m. The study consisted of three phases: pretest, acquisition, and 24-hour retention test. Performance accuracy was analyzed using a 4-way mixed ANOVA. RESULTS: Older adults consistently outperformed children (p < 0.001, η² = 0.503). Younger participants improved across acquisition and retention but showed no significant CI effect. In older adults, random practice led to better retention only at 5m (p = 0.006, η² = 0.1098), while performance at 3m and 4m remained stable. No significant interaction was found between CI and practice volume (p = 0.238). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that CI effects depend on task novelty and difficulty rather than age or settings alone. Based on these findings, we propose the Novelty of the Task Hypothesis, suggesting that the CI effect may depend on the relative novelty and challenge of a task for the learner. In applied settings, CI may be less effective when tasks are already well-practiced. Future studies should explore CI across diverse motor tasks and environments. Literature: Ávila et al. (2012). Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(6), 849–853. Battig (1966). Facilitation and interference. In E. A. Bilodeau (Ed.), Acquisition of skill (pp. 215–244). Academic Press. Brady (2004). Contextual Interference: A Meta-Analytic Study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99(1), 116–126. Chiviacowsky et al. (2008). Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(3), 405–410. Czyż et al. (2024a). The effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1377122. Czyż et al. (2024b). High contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientific Reports 2024 14:1, 14(1), 1–45.
Read CV Stanisław CzyżECSS Paris 2023: OP-BM19
INTRODUCTION: In daily life, we are required to learn new motor skills and to adapt our movements to changes in our environment. This dynamic process of adjusting to changes in our environment is known as “motor adaptation” and constitutes an important category of motor learning. Studies have shown that a single session of aerobic exercise (AE) can enhance motor adaptation compared to rest. Specifically, high intensity AE can increase motor adaptation, while moderate intensity AE has been shown to both enhance motor adaptation and to have no effect. No studies have investigated the impact of low intensity AE on motor adaptation. Hence, it is still unclear how the intensity of AE influences motor adaptation. This study aimed to investigate the dose-response effect of AE intensity on motor adaptation while controlling for other AE exercise parameters (duration, type) in young adults. We hypothesized that moderate and high AE intensity would lead to greater motor adaptation compared to rest. METHODS: Eighty healthy young adults (18–39 years) were divided into four groups (n=20/group): 20 min of interval AE training at high-intensity (HIIT), moderate-intensity (MIIT), low-intensity (LIIT), or Rest (control). A visit prior to the intervention was conducted to perform an incremental cycling test to assess cardiorespiratory capacity. Heart rate reserve (HRR) was used to prescribe the AE intensity for visit 2. AE consisted of four blocks of 3-min cycling on an ergometer (LIIT, 35%HRR; MIIT, 55%HRR; HIIT, 80%HRR), interspersed with 2 min of active recovery (25%HRR). Perceptual responses (effort, muscle pain and affects) were reported during AE/Rest sessions. Participants completed a visuomotor rotation task (45°) immediately (acquisition: motor adaptation) and 24-h (retention test: motor learning) after AE/Rest. Performance was assessed using spatial (e.g., angle at peak velocity) and temporal (e.g., reaction time) metrics. RESULTS: The results revealed a dose-response effect of AE intensity on motor adaptation and learning. HIIT and MIIT increased motor learning more than LIIT and Rest (temporal and spatial metrics). HIIT showed the greatest motor adaptation (temporal and spatial metrics), followed by MIIT, then LIIT (temporal metrics). Findings showed that the lower the AE intensity, the more positive perceptual responses (e.g., less muscle pain, lower perception of effort). CONCLUSION: This research is the first to reveal a dose-response effect of AE intensity on motor learning. Specifically, the higher the AE intensity, the larger the improvements in motor adaptation and learning. These findings suggest that exercise intensity prescription could be a key factor in tailoring training protocols for athletes to enhance motor skills and adapt to varying dynamics in sport. Since MIIT elicited more favorable perceptual responses than HIIT, clinicians may consider MIIT as a viable alternative for individuals who may be more impacted by the negative perceptual responses associated with HIIT.
Read CV Nesrine HarroumECSS Paris 2023: OP-BM19
INTRODUCTION: Creative actions are motor solutions that emerge within the dynamic interactions of the individual, task, and the environment (1). The emergence of creative action is associated with the sheer variety of action solutions an individual explores, that is, in the variety in coordination and control solutions (2). This study aimed to examine whether targeted manipulations of constraints during practice lead to specific changes in variability and creativity of action at the level of coordination and control. METHODS: Thirty-four participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups to practice striking a boxing bag: control (N=10), distance (N=12), orientation (N=12). The distance group practiced hitting the bag from different distances with the aim to invite a broad search for different coordination solutions, while the orientation group practiced hitting the bag from different orientations at a fix distance to invite a relatively narrow but persistent search for control solutions. All groups completed pre-test and retention test, in which they were instructed to strike the bag in as many ways as possible. Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for within and between group comparisons. RESULTS: Variability in coordination increased significantly in the distance group (Pre 2.81 ± 0.39, Retention: 2.95±0.29; P=0.05), while no significant change was observed in the orientation and control group (P>0.05). Manipulating orientation did not significantly alter control variability (Pre: 2.02±0.57, Retention: 2.10±0.46, P>0.05). Furthermore, the distance group showed higher creativity compared to orientation group (U (12,12) = 40, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that manipulating task constraints can have specific consequences for variability and creativity. The distance manipulation did increase variability and creative in coordination solutions, but not in control solutions. Manipulating the orientation didnt affect variability and creative, perhaps because it requires a longer timescale to manifest itself.
Read CV FAEZEH MOHAMMADI SANJANIECSS Paris 2023: OP-BM19