- Knowledge of results
- knowledge of performance
- Extrinsic, not naturally occuring
1. adds to a performers naturally occuring intrinsic feedback
2. Provides information about the
movement or movement outcome
3. Often from an instructor/external
person. But can be provided by
video or any other device.
1. MOTIVATIONAL ROLE
… provides a reward function “good job”
2. ATTENTION-DIRECTING ROLE
… directs attention (internal/external – or to specific features)
3. INFORMATIONAL ROLE
… provides error/accuracy information “too much rotation”
4. DEPENDENCY ROLE
…creates dependency/reliance on the information
Guidance hypothesis (acts as crutch, problem when removed)
- Information about the outcome
- How successful was the action with respect to the
intended environmental-goal?
- Aim of this information is to improve the next response
(detect), then repeat or change (correct)
- Important when learners cannot assess their own
errors/performance (otherwise redundant)
EXAMPLES:
“Your serve was 3 cm from the line” (tennis)
“You hit a 250 yard drive” (golf)
“You missed”
- information about movement quality/form
1. KP does not typically indicate anything about
environmental-goal success (different to KR)
2. Concerned with the quality of the movement
pattern (how an action was achieved)
EXAMPLES:
“You dropped your shoulder on that serve” (tennis)
“Keep your arm pointing at the target on the follow
through” (fastpitch softball)
- the most common type of performance knowledge
- can include kinematic analyses
EXAMPLE:
Dartfish (commercial)
Helps to make unobservable, observable
✓ Slow motion
✓ ‘Stroboscopic’
✓ Side by side
Analysis:
✓ Displacement profiles
✓ Joint angles
- when supplemented with cues
--> attention cues are effective, but correcting cues are even more effective
- Electronic measurement & feedback of an internal biological process
Provides information that
cannot be directly perceived
• Popular among high level
athletes
• Biofeedback helps the
individual better control of the
processes
PROs of KP vs. KR:
• Often more information, more precise
• Helps to zone-in on otherwise unobservable
processes
CONs of KP vs. KR:
• Can be too much information (overload)
• Often directs attention internally/to the body
(rather than external effects)
• May be too prescriptive (tells the performer what
needs changing) /discourages ‘active’ problemsolving which can lead to better learning.
1. Absolute Frequency
Total number of feedback presentations
2. Relative Frequency
% of trials in which FB given
Total # of feedback presentations
------------------------------------- x100
Total # of movement attempts
Guidance hypothesis:
“Learner can become dependent on augmented feedback if it diverts attention away from discovering how to accomplish the task goal in the absence of augmented feedback.”
feedback only occurs when error falls outside the criterion
produces a "faded" feedback frequency
as performance improves, errors are less likely, feedback happens less
1. Results in reduced frequency of feedback,
preventing dependency (guidance)
2. Frequency of being “correct” increases with
practice, potentially increase motivation.
3. Increases consistency by limiting “maladaptive”
(unnecessary) corrections
Terminal KP
- ensured that learner did not become dependent on the learning
1. when feedback is given too often
2. given during movements
3. given too quickly after performance
when longer, learning is enhanced
when shorter, not enough time to process internal feedback, laziness can occur because itn feels like someone else is doing all the learning