مقایسۀ الگوهای مشاهده‌ای در یادگیری تکالیف مختلف

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی رشتۀ تربیت بدنی (گرایش رفتار حرکتی)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران، ایران

3 استاد دانشگاه امام حسین، تهران، ایران

چکیده

 
هدف از تحقیق حاضر مقایسۀ الگوهای مشاهده‌ای در یادگیری تکلیف حرکتی دریافت توپ والیبال و تکلیف شناختی- حرکتی تردستی با سه توپ بود. آزمودنی‌ها 80 نفر از دانشجویان دختر 25-19 ساله بودند. در هر تکلیف 40 آزمودنی شرکت داشت. شرکت‌کننده‌ها به چهار گروه مشاهدۀ الگوی مبتدی، ماهر، ترکیبی و گروه فعالیت بدنی تقسیم شدند. همۀ گروه‌های مشاهده از طریق فیلم ویدئویی الگوی مخصوص به خود را تماشا کردند. در این تحقیق در هر دو تکلیف چند مرحلۀ اکتساب و آزمون یادداری و انتقال انجام گرفت. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها در مرحلۀ اکتساب از تحلیل واریانس با اندازه‌گیری مکرر و در آزمون‌های یادداری و انتقال از آزمون تحلیل واریانس یکطرفه و آزمون‌های تعقیبی مناسب استفاده شد (05/0P<). در تکلیف حرکتی، در مرحلۀ اکتساب مشاهدۀ الگوی ماهر- مبتدی نسبت به دیگر گروه‌ها بهتر بود، اما این برتری معنادار نبود، ولی در آزمون یادداری و انتقال مشاهدۀ الگوی ماهر- مبتدی، برتری معناداری داشت. در تکلیف شناختی- حرکتی، مشاهدۀ الگوی مبتدی در مرحلۀ اکتساب و آزمون یادداری و انتقال نسبت به گروه‌های دیگر بهتر بود، اما این برتری در آزمون انتقال معنادار نبود. براساس نتایج تحقیق حاضر پیشنهاد می‌شود که در یادگیری تکالیف مختلف، از شیوه‌های الگودهی متفاوتی استفاده شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Comparison of Observational Models in Learning Various Tasks

نویسندگان [English]

  • mahtab arabi 1
  • Abdollah Ghasemi 2
  • Seyed Mohammad Kazem Vaez Mousavi 3
1 Student of Physical Education (Motor Behavior), Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

 
The aim of this study was to compare observational models in learning motor task of receiving a volleyball ball and motor-cognitive task of juggling with 3 balls. The participants were 80 female students aged between 19 and 25. 40 subjects participated in each task. Participants were divided into 4 groups: novice model observation, expert, mixed and physical practice. All observational groups watched their own model via video tapes. In this study, some acquisition phases, retention and transfer tests were carried out in all two tasks. In acquisition phase, data were analyzed with ANOVA with repeated measures and in retention and transfer tests one-way ANOVA test and proper post hoc tests were used (P<0.05). In the acquisition phase, observation of expert-novice model in the motor task was better than the other groups but this predominance was not significant. But in the retention and transfer tests, observation of this model had a significant predominance. In the cognitive-motor task, the observation of novice model was better than the other groups during the acquisition phase, retention and transfer tests but this predominance was not significant in the transfer test. Finally,based on the results of the present study, it is suggested that various modeling methods should be used to learn different tasks.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Acquisition
  • juggling
  • observational learning
  • retention
  • Transfer
  1. سوزنده پور، سید رسول؛ موحدی، احمدرضا؛ مظاهری، لیلا؛ شریفی، غلامرضا (1388). «مقایسۀ دو روش خودالگودهی و نمایش ویدیویی مدل ماهر بر اکتساب و یادداری مهارت سرویس والیبال»، رشد و یادگیری حرکتی، ش 1، ص 77-66.
2. Al-Abood, S. A., Davids, K., Bennett, S. J., Ashford, D., & Martinez-Marin, M. “Effects of manipulating relative and absolute motion information dur-ing observational learning of an aiming task”. J Mot Behav. 2001. 33(3):295-305.
3. Andrieux Mathieu. Proteau Luc. (2014). “Mixed observation favors motor learning through better estimation of the model’s performance”. Exp Brain Res, 232(10):3121-32.
4. Andrieux, M., & Proteau, L. (2013). “Observation learning of a motor task: who and when?” Exp Brain Res. Aug; 229 (1):125-37.
5. Bartlett, J., Smith, L., Davic, K., &Peel, J. (1991)”Development of a valid volleyball skills test”. Battery. Journal of l'hysical Education, Recreation ad Daizce, 62, 345-351.
6. Barzouka, K., Bergeles, N., & Hatziharistos, D. (2007). “Effect of simultaneous model observation and self-modeling of volleyball skill acquisition”. Percept motor skill. 2007.104: 32-42.
7. Bates AT, Patel TP, Liddle PF. (2005). “External behavior monitoring mirrors internal behavior monitoring - Error-related negativity for observed errors”. J Psychophysiol, 19(4):281-288.
8. Bird G, Heyes C. (2005). “Effector-dependent learning by observation of a finger movement sequence”. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 31:262–275.
9. Brown LE, Wilson ET, Obhi SS, Gribble PL. (2010). Effect of Trial Order and Error Magnitude on Motor Learning by Observing. J Neurophysiol. 104:1409–1416.
10. Buchanan, J. J., & Dean, N. J. (2010). “Specificity in practice benefits learning in novice models and variability in demonstration benefits observational practice”. Psychol Res. 74:313–326.
11. Buchanan JJ, Ryu YU, Zihlman K, Wright DL. (2008). “Observational practice of relative but not absolute motion features in a singlelimb multi-joint coordination task”. Exp Brain Res. 191:157–169.
12. Cross ES, Kraemer DJM, Hamilton AFD, Kelley WM, Grafton ST (2009). Sensitivity of the Action Observation Network to Physical and Observational Learning. Cereb Cortex. 19:315–326.
13. Darden, G.F. (1997). “Demonstrating motor skills: Rethinking that expert demonstration. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance”. Aug; 68, 6; Health Module pg. 31.
14. Dushanova J, Donoghue J. (2010). Neurons in primary motor cortex engaged during action observation. Eur J of Neurosci. 31:386– 398.
15. Edwards, H. E. (2011). “Motor control and learning: From theory to practice. Bel-mont”. CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Publisher: Yolanda Cossio Acquisitions Editor.
16. Ferrari, M. (1996). “Observing the observer: Self-regulation in the observational learning of motor skills”. Dev Rev. 16, 203-240
17. Ghorbani, S., Bund, A. (2014). “Acquisition a Baseball-Pitch through Observation: What Information Is Extracted?” American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, Vol. 2, No. 6A, 18-2.
18. Ghobadi Neda, Daneshfar Afkham and Shojaei Masoumeh. (2013). “Comparing the effects of and expert models observation on performance and learning of futsal side foot pass”. Eur J Exp Biology. 3(1):508-512.
19. Guadagnoli, M.A. and Lee, T.D. (2004). “Challenge Point: A Framework for Conceptualizing the Effects of Various Practice Conditions”. J Mot Behav. 36: 212-224.
20. Hayes, J.S., Elliot, D., & Bennett, S.J. (2013). “Visual online control processes are acquired during observational practice”. Acta Psychologica, 143, 298-302.
21. Hayes, SJ. Ashford, D., Bennett, SJ. (2008). “Goal-directed imitation: The means to an end”. Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. PsycINFO classification, 2330; 2340; 2343.
22. Higuchi, S., Holle, H., Roberts, N., Eickhoff, S.B., &Vogt, S. (2012). “Imitation and observational learning of hand actions: Prefrontal involvement and connectivity”. Neuroimage, 59, 1668-1683.
23. Hirose T, Tsutsui S, Okuda S, Imanaka K. (2004). “Effectiveness of the use of a learning model and concentrated schedule in ob servational learning of a new bimanual coordination pattern”. Int J Sport Health, Sci. 2: 97-104.
24. Hodges, N. J., Chua, R., & Franks, I. M. (2003). “The role of video in facilitating perception and action of a novel coordination movement”. J Mot Behav. 35(3): 247–260.
25. Kyllo, L. B., & Landers, D. M, (1995). “Goal setting in sport and exercise: A research synthesis to resolve the controversy”. J Sport Exer Psychol. 17: 117–137.
26. Larssen, B.C., Ong, N.T., & Hodges, N.J. (2012). “What and learn: Seeing is better than doing when acquiring consecutive motor tasks”. Plos One, 7(6), 1-8.
27. Lee, T.D., & White, M.A. (1990). Influence of an unskilled model's practice schedule on observational motor learning. Hum Mov Sci. 9:349–367.
28. Magill.R.M. (2007). “Motor learning, Concepts and Application”. 6th edition, Mc Graw-Hill publisher.
29. Maslovat, D., Hayes S, J., Horn, R., & Hodges, N. J. (2010). “Motor learning through observation”. In D, Elliott & M.A. Khan (Eds.), Vision and Goal-Di-rected Movement: Neurobehavioural Perspectives. (1nd ed., pp. 315-340).
30. McMorris, terry. (2004). “Acquisition & Performance of Sport Skills”. The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England.
31. Meaney, K., Griffin, L.K., & Hart, M. (2005). “The effect of model similarity on girls’ motor performance”. J Teac phys Educ. 24: 165-178.
32. Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. (2011). “Learning through observation: acombination of expert and novice models favors learning”. Exp Brain Res. 215:183–197
33. Schmidt, R.A., & Wrisberg. C. A. (2004). “Motor learning and performance”. (3rd edition), Human kinetics Publisher.
34. Schmidt, R.A., & Lee, T.D. (2005). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
35. Schmidt, R. A. A. (1975). Schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psycol Rev. 82: 225-260.
36. Shane MS, Stevens M, Harenski CL, Kiehl KA. (2008). “Neural correlates of the processingof another's mistakes: A possible underpinning for social and observational learning”. Neuroimage. 42(1): 450459.
37. Ste-Marie, D.M., Law, B., Rymal, A.M., Jennie, O., Hall, C., & McCullagh, P. (2012). “Observation interventions for motor skill learning and performance: An applied model for the use of observation”. International Review of Sports and Exercise Psychology, 5(2), 145-176.
38. Southard, D., & Higgins, T. (1987). Changing movement patterns: Effects of demonstration and practice. Res Q Exerc Sport. 58: 77-80.
39. Welsher; McMaster. (2015).” The Impact of Variability in Observational Practice on Skill Learning: Theoretical and Applied Considerations”. Degree Master of Science Copyright by Arthur Michael Welsher, September. McMaster University (Kinesiology) Hamilton, Ontario.pg: 21.
40. Whiting H.T.A. (1988). “Imitation and the learning of complex cyclic actions. Complex motor behavior, the motor action controversy”. Amesterdam; North Holland. PP: 381-401
41. Wulf, G., & Shea, C.H. (2002). “Principles derived form the study of simple motor skills do not generalize to complex skill learning”. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.9: 185-211.