Enhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting

doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.009

Psychology of Sport and Exercise

Volume 22, January 2016, Pages 229-232

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.009 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
We examine whether easy versus difficult criteria for “success” enhance learning.
•
Two groups of participants putt golf balls to a target.
•
Large versus small circles around the target indicate “successful” putts.
•
Practice with an easy criterion (large circle) enhances retention and transfer.
•
Enhancing performance expectancies leads to more effective motor skill learning.

Abstract

Objectives

To examine the influence of enhanced expectancies on motor learning, we manipulated learners' expectancies by providing criteria for “success” that were relatively easy or difficult to meet.

Design

Experimental design with two groups.

Method

Two groups of non-golfers practiced putting golf balls to a target from a distance of 150 cm. The target was surrounded by a large (14 cm diameter) and a small circle (7 cm diameter) during practice. The groups were informed that balls coming to rest in the large circle (large-circle group) or small circle (small-circle group), respectively, constituted a “good” trial. One day later, the circles were removed. Participants putted from the same distance (retention) and a greater distance (transfer: 180 cm).

Results

On both retention and transfer tests, accuracy was greater for the large-circle compared with the small-circle group.

Conclusions

Enhancing expectancies by providing a relatively “easy” performance criterion led to more effective learning.

Section snippets

Participants

Thirty-four undergraduate kinesiology students (12 males, 22 females), with an average age of 24.6 years (SD: 5.20) and little or no experience playing golf, participated in the experiment. Participants were naïve as to the purpose of the study, and they gave their written informed consent before participation. The study was approved by the university's institutional review board.

Apparatus and task

Participants were asked to putt standard white golf balls to a horizontal target (2 × 2 cm square) on a level

Pre-test

The two groups' putting performance on the pre-test did not differ significantly, F (1, 32) = .695 (see Fig. 1).

Practice

During the practice phase, both groups consistently reduced their deviations from the target. The main effect of block was significant, F (4, 128) = 4.73, p = .001, $η_{p}^{2}$ = .13. Block 1 differed from Block 5 (p < .01). Large-circle group participants experienced “good” performance (i.e., balls coming to rest in the large circle) on 22.0% of the practice trials, whereas participants in

Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether enhancing learners' expectancies by providing them with an “easy” criterion for good performance, relative a more difficult one, would lead to more effective learning of a golf-putting task. This was indeed the case. Large-circle group participants who, according to the criterion provided to them, had more successful putts during the practice phase, generally outperformed participants of the small-circle group who had fewer successful

References (39)

F.G. Ashby et al.
Cortical and basal ganglia contributions to habit learning and automaticity
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2010)
L.T.G. Ávila et al.
Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children
Psychology of Sport and Exercise
(2012)
J. Jubb et al.
The sweetest pill to swallow: how patient neurobiology can be harnessed to maximise placebo effects
Neuroscience and Biobehaviroal Reviews
(2013)
E.C. Kal et al.
External attentional focus enhances movement automatization: a comprehensive test of the constrained action hypothesis
Human Movement Science
(2013)
E. Saemi et al.
Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning
Psychology of Sport & Exercise
(2012)
D. Shohamy et al.
Dopamine and adaptive memory
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2010)
D. Stevens et al.
Does self-efficacy mediate transfer effects in the learning of easy and difficult motor skills?
Consciousness and Cognition
(2012)
R. Badami et al.
Feedback about more accurate versus less accurate trials: differential effects on self-confidence and activation
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
(2012)
R.F. Baumeister
Choking under pressure: self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1984)
G. Chauvel et al.
Enhanced expectancies resulting from visual illusions can facilitate sport skill learning
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
(2015)

S. Chiviacowsky et al.

Feedback after good trials enhances learning

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

(2007)

S. Chiviacowsky et al.

Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence

Frontiers in Psychology

(2012)

S. Chiviacowsky et al.

KR after good trials enhances learning in older adults

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

(2009)

S.E. Clark et al.

The impact of self-as-a-model interventions on children's self-regulation of learning and swimming performance

Journal of Sports Sciences

(2007)

R.M. Costa

Plastic corticostriatal circuits for action learning – what's dopamine got to do with It?

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

(2007)

E.L. Deci et al.

Self-determination theory: a macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health

Canadian Psychology

(2008)

J.C. Hutchinson et al.

The effect of manipulated self-efficacy on perceived and sustained effort

Journal of Applied Sport Psychology

(2008)

I. Kirsch

Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and behavior

American Psychologist

(1985)

R. Lewthwaite et al.

Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

(2010)

Cited by (55)

Positive feedback enhances motivation and skill learning in adolescents
2024, Learning and Motivation
Studies have shown that feedback indicating good performance facilitates motor skill learning. The present study examined whether enhancing learners’ expectancies through simple encouraging feedback would boost motivation and learning. Adolescent participants performed a linear positioning task. The goal was to move a slide to a target 60 cm to the right and include a reversal movement on the way. Veridical feedback related to spatial accuracy was provided to all participants after each of eight 10-trial practice blocks. An enhanced expectancy (EE) group was given an additional positive feedback statement after each practice block, while a control group received no such feedback. Retention (60 cm target distance) and transfer (45 cm) tests were performed without feedback on the following day. The EE group demonstrated greater movement accuracy than the control group on both tests. Moreover, self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, positive affect, and interest in continued practice were significantly higher for the EE group after practice and before retention testing. The findings demonstrate that, in line with OPTIMAL theory (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) predictions, enhancing learners’ expectancies by providing positive feedback resulted in benefits for intrinsic motivation and skill learning.
Enhanced expectancies benefit performance under distraction, but compromise it under stress: Exploring the OPTIMAL theory
2023, Human Movement Science
Motor learning can benefit from practice under enhanced expectancies; that is, the belief one can generate an intended positive outcome. According to the OPTIMAL (Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning) theory, this benefit manifests from a greater coupling between action and its external consequences, which potentially coincides with a more automatic mode of control. The aim of the study was to examine this possibility, and in so doing, understand more about the psycho-motor processes underpinning the influence of expectancies. On Day 1, novice participants practiced a dart-throwing task under enhanced (EE) (n = 11), reduced (RE) (n = 12) or no (control; CTL) (n = 12) expectancies. Enhanced and reduced expectancies were indirectly manipulated by positively reinforcing shots that landed within the large or small circle on the dartboard, respectively. On Day 2, participants transferred to a dual-task (i.e., tone-counting) or stress (i.e., social-comparative threat, false feedback) setting. While there was no evidence of improvement across practice, RE was significantly worse than CTL for the dual-task, but EE was significantly worse than RE and CTL under stress (ps < 0.05). Therefore, the ability of EE to retain performance within the dual-task, but decline under stress, suggests a more automatic mode of control was adopted. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
That looks easy! Evidence against the benefits of an easier criterion of success for enhancing motor learning
2023, Psychology of Sport and Exercise
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.
Different task success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not improve golf putting performance
2021, Psychology of Sport and Exercise
Citation Excerpt :
Indeed, in two previous studies (Palmer et al., 2016; Ziv, Ochayon, et al., 2019), a large circle around a target led to a success rate of 15–22% and a small circle around the target led to a success rate of 5–8%. The former success rates led to improved putting performance and learning (Palmer et al., 2016) or just learning (Ziv, Ochayon, et al., 2019). It is possible that success rates of between 15 and 24% are sufficient to induce improved motor performance and learning.
This study examined how providing different criteria for success affected perceived expectations of success, performance, and learning in a golf-putting task. Twenty-nine physical education students were divided into three experimental groups: (a) a large-circle (LC) group that practiced 10 blocks of five putts, each with a 40 cm diameter circle around the target; (b) a small circle (SC) group that practiced with a 10 cm diameter circle around the target; and (c) a control (C) group that practiced with a 25 cm diameter circle around the target. Forty-eight hours after practice, the participants performed a retention test and a transfer test with a 25 cm diameter circle. The transfer test included putting from a greater distance and from a different angle. Throughout the study, we asked the participants to tell us what they think their chances are to land 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 balls out of 5 possible balls in each block. There were four main findings: (a) the SC group had lower expectancies of success compared with the LC and C groups in acquisition; (b) there were no group differences in performance or learning among groups; (c) golf club kinematic parameters worsened in the transfer test; and (d) the LC group reduced their expectancies of success from the retention to the transfer test, but the expectancies of the SC and C groups remained the same. We conclude that changes in success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not affect actual putting performance or learning.
Difficulty is a Real Challenge: A Perspective on the Role of Cognitive Effort in Motor Skill Learning
2020, Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Does focus of attention alter craniocervical flexion test motor learning? A randomized controlled trial
2020, Human Movement Science
To evaluate the effects of three different foci of attention (internal, external and mixed) on motor learning using craniocervical flexion test in inexperienced participants.
Ninety healthy young adults, with no experience in the task, practiced the craniocervical flexion test under three different focus of attention: a) Mixed Focus (internal plus external), b) Internal Focus, and c) External Focus. We assessed immediate, post-training, and retention (one week after the last training session) aspects of motor learning by quantifying (i) the activity of the superficial cervical flexors muscles, (ii) craniocervical range of motion, and (iii) the performance on the craniocervical flexion test.
None of the groups showed any significant immediate, post-training, or retention effects on superficial neck flexors activity and craniocervical range of motion progression. At immediate assessment, mixed focus had greater craniocervical flexion performance than external (MD 0.9, 95%CI 0.2 to 1.5), and internal foci (MD 1.4, 95%CI 0.8 to 2.1). At post-training, mixed focus led to better craniocervical performance compared to external (MD 1.6, 95%CI 0.8 to 2.4) and internal foci (MD 2.7, 95%CI 1.9 to 3.5). External focus had better scores on the craniocervical flexion test performance than internal focus (MD 1.1, 95%CI 0.3 to 1.9). Results remained similar at retention, with mixed focus being superior to internal (MD 2.3, 95%CI 1.7 to 3) and external foci (MD 1.5, 95%CI 0.9 to 2.1) on craniocervical flexion test performance. Similarly, the performance on the craniocervical flexion test performance remained similar at retention between external and internal foci (MD 0.9, 95%CI 0.2 to 1.5).
In inexperienced asymptomatic participants, different foci of attention were not able to change cervical muscle activity and craniocervical range of motion during the craniocervical flexion test. Mixed focus was better than external and internal focus on the craniocervical flexion test. These findings were retained after one week.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Enhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting

Highlights

Abstract

Objectives

Design

Method

Results

Conclusions

Section snippets

Participants

Apparatus and task

Pre-test

Practice

Discussion

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Psychology of Sport and Exercise

Neuroscience and Biobehaviroal Reviews

Human Movement Science

Psychology of Sport & Exercise

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Consciousness and Cognition

Feedback about more accurate versus less accurate trials: differential effects on self-confidence and activation

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Choking under pressure: self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Enhanced expectancies resulting from visual illusions can facilitate sport skill learning

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Feedback after good trials enhances learning

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence

Frontiers in Psychology

KR after good trials enhances learning in older adults

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

The impact of self-as-a-model interventions on children's self-regulation of learning and swimming performance

Journal of Sports Sciences

Plastic corticostriatal circuits for action learning – what's dopamine got to do with It?

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Self-determination theory: a macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health

Canadian Psychology

The effect of manipulated self-efficacy on perceived and sustained effort

Journal of Applied Sport Psychology

Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and behavior

American Psychologist

Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology