تعداد نشریات | 161 |
تعداد شمارهها | 6,532 |
تعداد مقالات | 70,502 |
تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,116,954 |
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,221,791 |
تأثیر ترکیب دو شیوۀ تمرینی مشاهده و سایهزنی بر یادگیری مهارت پرتاب دارت | ||
رشد و یادگیری حرکتی ورزشی | ||
مقاله 7، دوره 10، شماره 3، آذر 1397، صفحه 431-450 اصل مقاله (442.62 K) | ||
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی Released under CC BY-NC 4.0 license I Open Access I | ||
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jmlm.2019.249629.1335 | ||
نویسندگان | ||
نرگس عبدلی* 1؛ نسرین پارسایی2؛ حسن رهبان فرد2 | ||
1دانشجوی دکتری رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدۀ تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، ایران | ||
2استادیار، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدۀ علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران | ||
چکیده | ||
پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی تأثیر ترکیب دو شیوۀ تمرینی مشاهده و سایهزنی بر یادگیری مهارت پرتاب دارت صورت گرفت. بدینمنظور 60 دانشآموز دختر دبیرستانی داوطلب (19-17 سال)، انتخاب شدند و بعد از اجرای پیشآزمون بهطور تصادفی در پنج گروه مشاهدهای، سایهزنی، فیزیکی، ترکیبی (مشاهده ـ سایهزنی) و کنترل قرار گرفتند. گروههای تمرینی در مرحلۀ اکتساب، مهارت پرتاب دارت را براساس دستورالعمل ویژۀ هر گروه 60 مرتبه تمرین کردند. ده دقیقه پس از مرحلۀ اکتساب، آزمون یادداری/انتقال فوری اجرا شد و پس از 24 ساعت بیتمرینی آزمون یادداری/ انتقال تأخیری انجام گرفت. آزمون تحلیل واریانس با اندازههای تکراری (سطح معناداری 05/0) نشان میدهد گروهها بهطور معناداری عملکرد بهتری در مقایسه با گروه کنترل دارند (05/0>P). همچنین گروه فیزیکی و گروه ترکیبی در مقایسه با گروههای مشاهده و سایهزنی بهطور معناداری عملکرد بهتری دارند (05/0>P). میزان یادگیری گروه ترکیبی برابر با تمرین فیزیکی است (05/0P<). بهطور کلی، نتایج این پژوهش نشان میدهد با ترکیب مشاهده و سایهزنی، یادگیری برابر با تمرین فیزیکی رخ میدهد. این یافتهها پیشنهاد میدهد با توجه به اینکه این شیوۀ تمرینی، در هر زمان و هر مکان و با حداقل امکانات قابل اجراست، میتواند زمان و هزینههای آموزشی را کاهش دهد و حتی در شرایطی خاص جایگزین تمرین فیزیکی شود. | ||
کلیدواژهها | ||
تمرین ترکیبی؛ تمرین سایهزنی؛ مهارت پرتاب دارت؛ یادگیری مشاهدهای | ||
مراجع | ||
1. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Human Kinetics C, IL. ISBN-13: 9780736079617, editor, 2011. 290-293. 2. Lotfi Gh, Mohammadpour M. The Effect of Three Models of Observational Learning on Acquisition and Learning of Archery’s Skill in Novice Boy Adolescents. International Journal of Sport Studies. 2014;4(4):480-6. 3. Poollock BJ, Lee TD. Effects of the model's skill level on observational motor learning. Research quarterly for exercise and sport 1992;63(1):25-9. 4. Shea CH, Wright DL, Wulf G, Whitacre C. Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities. J Motor Behav 2000;32(1):27-36. 5. Hodges NJ, Williams AM, Hayes SJ, Breslin G. What is modeled during observational learning? J Sport Sci. 2007;25:531-45. 6. Wulf G, Mornell A. Insights about practice from the perspective of motor learning: a review. Music Perform Res. 2008;2:1-25. 7. Sheffield FN. Theoretical consideration in the learning of complex sequential task from demonstration and practice. In: Lumsdaine AA (Ed) Student Response in Programmed Instruction. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Washington. 1961:13-32. 8. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs P-H, NJ, editor1986. 9. Schmidt RA. A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review. 1975;82:225-60. 10. Scully DM, Newell KM. Observational learning and the acquisition of motor skills: Toward a visual perception perspective. J Hum Movement Stud. 1985;11(4):169-86. 11. Entezari Z, Farsi A, Abdoli B. Effect of Contextual Interference in Video Feedback on Kinematic Characteristic Acquisition of Football Pass. European J Exp Biology. 2017. 12. Carroll WR, Bandura A. The role of visual monitoring in observational learning of action patterns: making the unobservable observable. J Motor Behav. 1982;14(2):153-67. 13. Blandin Y, Proteau L, Alain C. On the cognitive processes underlying contextual interference and observational learning. Journal of motor behavior. 1994;26(1):18-26. 14. Buchanan JJ, Dean NJ. Specificity in practice benefits learning in novice models and variability in demonstration benefits observational practice. Psychol Res. 2010;74(3):313-26. 15. Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. Learning through observation: a combination of expert and novice models favors learning. Exp Brain Res. 2011;215:183-97. 16. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Observation learning of a motor task: who and when? Exp Brain Res. 2013;229:125-37. 17. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Mixed observation favors motor learning through better estimation of the model's performance. Exp Brain Res. 2014. 18. Andrieux M, Proteau L. Observational Learning: Tell Beginners What They Are about to Watch and They Will Learn Better. Psychol/ Movement Science and Sport Psychology. 2016. 19. Adams JK. use of the models knowledge of results to increase the observers performance. Journal of Human Movment Studies. 1986;12:89-98. 20. Kohl RM, Shea CH. Acquisition of hierarchical control as a function of observational practice, PEW 1966 revisited. J Motor Behav. 1992;24(3):247-60. 21. Blandin Y, Proteau L. On the cognitive basis of observational learning: Development of mechanisms for the detection and correction of errors. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A-Human Experimental Psychology 2000;53(3):846-67. 22. Kilner JM, Neal A, Weiskopf N, Friston KJ, Frith CD Evidence of mirror neurons in human inferior frontal gyrus. J Neurosci. 2009;29:10153-9. 23. Oosterhof NN, Wiggett AJ, Diedrichsen J, Tipper SP, Downing PE. Surface–based information mapping reveals crossmodal vision-action representations in human parietal and occipitotemporal cortex. J Neurophysiol. 2010;104:1077-89. 24. Buccino G, Binkofski F, Fink GR, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Gallese V, et al. Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: an fMRI study. Eur J Neurosci. 2001;13:400-4. 25. Gallese V, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Rizzolatti G. Action representation and the inferior parietal lobule, «in Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance, Vol XIX, eds WPrinz, and B Hommel (Oxford: Oxford University Press). 2002:247-66. 26. Cisek P, Kalaska JF. Neural correlates of mental rehearsal in dorsal premotor cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2004;431:993-6. 27. Frey SH, Gerry VE. Modulation of neural activity during observational learning of actions and their sequential orders. J Neurosci. 2006;26:13194-201. 28. Cross ES, Kraemer DJM, Hamilton AFD, Kelley WM, Grafton ST. Sensitivity of the action observation network to physical and Observational learning. Cereb Cortex. 2009;19:315-26. 29. Dushanova J, Donoghue J. Neurons in primary motor cortex engaged during action observation. Eur J Neurosci. 2010:31:386-98. 30. Rizzolatti G, Cattaneo L, Fabbri-Destro M, Rozzi S. Cortical Mechanisms underlying the organization of goal-directed actions and Mirror neuron-based action understanding. Physiol Rev. 2014;94:655-706. 31. Carroll WR, Bandura A. Representational guidance of action production in observational learning: a causal analysis. J Motor Behav. 1990;22(1):85-97. 32. Ferrari M. Observing the Observer: Self-Regulation in the Observational Learning of Motor Skills. Dev Rev 1996;16(2):203-40. 33. Blandin Y, Lhuisset L, Proteau L. Cognitive processes underlying observational learning of motor skills. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A-Human Experimental Psychology. 1999;52(4):957-79. 34. Trempe M, Sabourin M, Rohbanfard H, Proteau L. Observation learning versus physical practice leads to different consolidation outcomes in a movement timing task Exp Brain Res. 2011;209(2):181-92. 35. Lee TD, White MA. Influence of an unskilled models practice schedule on observational motor learning. Hum Mov Sci. 1990;9(3-5):349-67. 36. Deakin JM, Proteau L. The role of scheduling in learning through observation. J Motor Behav. 2000;32(3):268-76 37. Clark S, Tremblay F, Ste-Marie D. Differential modulation of corticospinal excitability during observation, mental imagery and imitation of hand actions Neuropsychologia 2004;42:105-12 38. Munzert J, Zentgraf K, Stark R, Vaitl D. Neural activation in cognitive motor processes: comparing motor imagery and observation of gymnastic movements. Exp brain res 2008;188(3):437-44 39. Flores AM, Bercades D, Florendo F. Effectiveness of Shadow Practice in Learning the Standard Table Tennis Backhand. International Journal of Table Tennis Sciences. 2010;5:105-10 40. Emanuel M, Jarus T, Bart O. Effect of Focus of Attention and Age on Motor Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer: A Randomized Trial. PHYS THER. 2008;88:251-60. 41. Waterhouse C. The Effect of Extended Practice on EMG, Kinematics and Accuracy in Dominant and Non-dominant Dart Throwing. http://scholar.colorado.edu/honr theses,2014. 42. McCullagh P, Weiss MR. Modeling:Considerations for motor skill performance and psychological responses. In R. M. Singer, J. A. Hausenblaus & C. M. Janelle (Eds). Handbook of Sport Psychology. 2001;2: 205-38 43. Heyes CM, Foster CL. Motor learning by observation: evidence from a serial reaction time task. J Exp Psychol 2002;55:593-607. 44. Mattar AAG, Gribble PL. Motor learning by observing Neuron 2005;46(1):153–60. 45. Badets A, Blandin Y, Wright DL, Shea CH. Error detection Processes during observational learning. Res Q Exerc Sport 2006;77:177-84. 46. Hayes SJ, Elliott D, Bennett SJ. General motor representations are developed during action-observation. Exp Brain Res 2010;204:199-206. 47. Hodges L. Instructor’s Guide to Table Tennis. Retrieved May 2008 from wwwusattorg/organization/instructors-guidepdf. 1989. 48. Florendo F, Bercades D. The effectiveness of shadow practice in learning the standard forehand drive. International Table Tennis Federation. 2007;10:18-20. 49. MH T, H c. An experimental study of Thorndike s theory of learning. J general Psycho. 1932;7:245-60. 50. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 51. Magill RA, Anderson D. Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications: 9thed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011;298-310. 52. Kilner JM. More than one pathway to action understanding. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011;15:352–7. 53. Chartrand TL, Bargh JA. The chameleon effect: the perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999(76):893–910. 54. Iacoboni M, Dapretto M. The mirror neuron system and the consequences of its dysfunction. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2006;7(12):942-51. 55. Molnar-Szakacsa I. From actions to empathy and morality – A neural perspective. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2011;77:76–85. | ||
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 439 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 298 |