Does Learning a Skill with the Expectation of Teaching It Impair the Skill’s Execution Under Psychological Pressure If the Skill is Learned with Analogy Instructions?

Objective: Having learners practice a motor skill with the expectation of teaching it (versus an expectation of being tested on it) has been revealed to enhance skill learning. However, this improvement in skill performance is lost when the skill must be performed under psychological pressure due to ‘choking under pressure.’ The present study investigated whether this choking effect is caused by an accrual of declarative knowledge during skill practice and could be prevented if a technique (analogy instructions) to minimize the accrual of declarative knowledge during practice is employed. Design: We used a 2 (Expectation: teach/test) x 2 (Instructions: analogy/explicit) x 2 (Posttest: low-pressure/high-pressure) mixed-factor design, with repeated measures on the last factor. Methods: One-hundred fifty-six participants were quasi-randomly assigned (based on sex) to one of four groups. Participants in the teach/analogy and teach/explicit groups practiced golf putting with the expectation of teaching putting to another participant, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. Participants in the test/analogy and test/explicit groups practiced golf putting with the expectation of being tested on their putting, and analogy instructions or explicit instructions, respectively. The next day all participants completed low- and high-pressure putting posttests, with their putting accuracy serving as the dependent variable. Results: We observed an Expectation x Instructions × Posttest interaction, such that a main effect of expectation was found in the low-pressure posttest, with the teach group exhibiting superior accuracy, and an Expectation × Instructions interaction was revealed for the high-pressure posttest. This interaction resulted from the teach group showing greater accuracy than the test group exclusively when receiving analogy instructions. Conclusion: Results show that participants who practiced with the expectation of teaching exhibited superior learning and indicate that they choked under pressure likely due to their accrual of declarative knowledge during practice, since the choking effect was prevented by having them practice with analogy instructions. Accordingly, having learners practice with the expectation of teaching and techniques that minimize the accrual of declarative knowledge is recommended

That Looks Easy!: Evidence Against the Benefits of an Easier Criterion of Success for Enhancing Motor Learning

OPTIMAL theory predicts providing learners with a relatively easier criterion of success during practice enhances motor learning through increased self-efficacy, perceptions of competence, and intrinsic motivation. However, mixed results in the literature suggest this enhancement effect may be moderated by the number of successes achieved by learners practicing with the difficult criterion. To investigate this possibility, we manipulated quantity of practice to affect the absolute number of successes achieved by learners practicing with different success criteria. Eighty participants were divided into four groups and performed 50 or 100 trials of a mini-shuffleboard task. Groups practiced with either a large or a small zone of success surrounding the target. Learning was assessed 24 h after acquisition with retention and transfer tests. In terms of endpoint accuracy and precision, there were no learning or practice performance benefits of practicing with an easier criterion of success, regardless of the number of trials. This absence of a criterion of success effect was despite the efficacy of our manipulation in increasing the number of trials stopping within the zone of success, self-efficacy, perceptions of competence, and, for participants with 100 trials, intrinsic motivation. An equivalence test indicated that the effect of criterion of success was small, if existent. Moreover, at the individual level, intrinsic motivation did not predict posttest or acquisition performance. There were no benefits of easing the criterion of success on pressure, effort, accrual of explicit knowledge, or conscious processing. These data challenge key tenets of OPTIMAL theory and question the efficacy of easing criterion of success for motor learning

Relationship Between Reward-Related Brain Activity and Opportunities to Sit

The present study tested whether energy-minimizing behaviors evoke reward-related brain activity that promotes the repetition of these behaviors via reinforcement learning processes. Fifty-eight healthy young adults in a standing position performed a task where they could earn a reward either by sitting down or squatting while undergoing electroencephalographic (EEG) recording. Reward-prediction errors were quantified as the amplitude of the EEG-derived reward positivity. Results showed that reward positivity was larger on reward versus no reward trials, confirming the validity of our paradigm to measure evoked reward-related brain activity. However, results showed no evidence that sitting (versus standing and squatting) trials led to larger reward positivity. Moreover, we found no evidence suggesting that this effect was moderated by typical physical activity, physical activity on the day of the study, or energy expenditure during the experiment. However, at the behavioral level, results showed that the probability of choosing the stimulus more likely to lead to sitting than standing increased as the number of trials increased. In addition, results revealed that the probability of changing the selected stimulus was higher when the previous trial was a stand trial relative to a sit trial. In sum, neural results showed no evidence supporting the theory that opportunities to minimize energy expenditure are rewarding. However, behavioral findings suggested participants tend to choose the less effortful behavioral alternative and were therefore consistent with the theory of effort minimization (TEMPA)

Higher inhibitory control is required to escape the innate attraction to effort minimization

International audienceRecent evidence suggests humans have an automatic attraction to effort minimization. Yet, how this attraction is associated with response inhibition is still unclear. Here, we used go/no-go tasks to capture inhibitory control in response to stimuli depicting physical activity versus physical inactivity in 59 healthy young individuals. Higher commission errors (i.e., failure to refrain a response to a “no-go” stimulus) indicated lower inhibitory control. Based on the energetic cost minimization theory, we hypothesized that participants would exhibit higher commission errors when responding to physical inactivity stimuli rather than physical activity stimuli. Mixed effects models showed that, compared to physical activity stimuli, participants exhibited higher commission errors when responding to stimuli depicting physical inactivity (odds ratio = 1.59, 95% Confidence Interval = 1.18 to 2.16, p = .003). These results suggest that physical inactivity stimuli might require high response inhibition. This study lends support for the hypothesis that an attraction to effort minimization might affect inhibitory processes in the presence of stimuli related to this minimization. The study pre-registration form can be found at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RKYH