16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Working Memory Capacity Limits Motor Learning When Implementing Multiple Instructions

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Although it is generally accepted that certain practice conditions can place large demands on working memory (WM) when performing and learning a motor skill, the influence that WM capacity has on the acquisition of motor skills remains unsubstantiated. This study examined the role of WM capacity in a motor skill practice context that promoted WM involvement through the provision of explicit instructions. A cohort of 90 children aged 8 to 10 years were assessed on measures of WM capacity and attention. Children who scored in the lowest and highest thirds on the WM tasks were allocated to lower WM capacity ( n = 24) and higher WM capacity ( n = 24) groups, respectively. The remaining 42 participants did not participate in the motor task. The motor task required children to practice basketball shooting for 240 trials in blocks of 20 shots, with pre- and post-tests occurring before and after the intervention. A retention test was administered 1 week after the post-test. Prior to every practice block, children were provided with five explicit instructions that were specific to the technique of shooting a basketball. Results revealed that the higher WM capacity group displayed consistent improvements from pre- to post-test and through to the retention test, while the opposite effect occurred in the lower WM capacity group. This implies that the explicit instructions had a negative influence on learning by the lower WM capacity children. Results are discussed in relation to strategy selection for dealing with instructions and the role of attention control.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach.

          A study was conducted in which 133 participants performed 11 memory tasks (some thought to reflect working memory and some thought to reflect short-term memory), 2 tests of general fluid intelligence, and the Verbal and Quantitative Scholastic Aptitude Tests. Structural equation modeling suggested that short-term and working memories reflect separate but highly related constructs and that many of the tasks used in the literature as working memory tasks reflect a common construct. Working memory shows a strong connection to fluid intelligence, but short-term memory does not. A theory of working memory capacity and general fluid intelligence is proposed: The authors argue that working memory capacity and fluid intelligence reflect the ability to keep a representation active, particularly in the face of interference and distraction. The authors also discuss the relationship of this capability to controlled attention, and the functions of the prefrontal cortex.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The generality of working memory capacity: a latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning.

            A latent-variable study examined whether verbal and visuospatial working memory (WM) capacity measures reflect a primarily domain-general construct by testing 236 participants in 3 span tests each of verbal WM. visuospatial WM, verbal short-term memory (STM), and visuospatial STM. as well as in tests of verbal and spatial reasoning and general fluid intelligence (Gf). Confirmatory' factor analyses and structural equation models indicated that the WM tasks largely reflected a domain-general factor, whereas STM tasks, based on the same stimuli as the WM tasks, were much more domain specific. The WM construct was a strong predictor of Gf and a weaker predictor of domain-specific reasoning, and the reverse was true for the STM construct. The findings support a domain-general view of WM capacity, in which executive-attention processes drive the broad predictive utility of WM span measures, and domain-specific storage and rehearsal processes relate more strongly to domain-specific aspects of complex cognition. ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity.

              In 2 experiments the authors examined whether individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity are related to attentional control. Experiment 1 tested high- and low-WM-span (high-span and low-span) participants in a prosaccade task, in which a visual cue appeared in the same location as a subsequent to-be-identified target letter, and in an antisaccade task, in which a target appeared opposite the cued location. Span groups identified targets equally well in the prosaccade task, reflecting equivalence in automatic orienting. However, low-span participants were slower and less accurate than high-span participants in the antisaccade task, reflecting differences in attentional control. Experiment 2 measured eye movements across a long antisaccade session. Low-span participants made slower and more erroneous saccades than did high-span participants. In both experiments, low-span participants performed poorly when task switching from antisaccade to prosaccade blocks. The findings support a controlled-attention view of WM capacity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                22 August 2017
                2017
                : 8
                : 1350
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living, Victoria University, Melbourne VIC, Australia
                [2] 2Game Insight Group, Tennis Australia, Melbourne VIC, Australia
                [3] 3Skill Acquisition, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra ACT, Australia
                [4] 4Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong VIC, Australia
                [5] 5School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane QLD, Australia
                [6] 6Faculty of Health, Sport and Human Performance, University of Waikato Hamilton, New Zealand
                [7] 7Department of Psychology, Bournemouth University Poole, United Kingdom
                [8] 8School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, Hong Kong
                Author notes

                Edited by: Maarten A. Immink, University of South Australia, Australia

                Reviewed by: Alberto Cordova, University of Texas at San Antonio, United States; Jennifer Johnson Didier, Sam Houston State University, United States

                *Correspondence: Tim Buszard, tim.buszard@ 123456vu.edu.au

                This article was submitted to Movement Science and Sport Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01350
                5572292
                28878701
                b8f2d6e8-dcbb-484f-bede-a1f06ca42bc9
                Copyright © 2017 Buszard, Farrow, Verswijveren, Reid, Williams, Polman, Ling and Masters.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 11 May 2017
                : 24 July 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 58, Pages: 12, Words: 0
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                working memory capacity,motor skill acquisition,instructions,explicit learning,children’s motor learning

                Comments

                Comment on this article