Learning, Performance and Transfer in a Mirror Drawing Task - Case Study Example

Practical 4: Learning, Performance and Transfer in a Mirror Drawing Task The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether practice conditions affect the learning process involving fine motor tasks. The experiment involved the learning of a fine motor skill s required to trace a star when viewed through a mirror. The first experiment assessed the effects of massed versus distributed practice on the retention of this skill. The results indicated that massed practice resulted in better performance, based on the accuracy of the tracing and the measured length of the tracing during the timed task. The second experiment involved an assessment of the effects of practice with the dominant hand on the performance in tracing the star through a mirror view with the non-dominant hand. The results indicated that the practice group performed better than the control group. Overall, the data suggest that the means of training may impact the learning processes associated with the acquisition of fine motor skills. Introduction The study of motor control involves an empirical assessment of the neurological factors critical to the acquisition of motor skills. The development of motor skills requires the ability to execute learned movements toward a directed result. This process requires learning. Skills require accuracy and the ability to execute motor functions in a controlled fashion. The study of motor behaviour involves an attempt to ascertain the mechanism by which motor skills are produced. This area encompasses motor development, control and learning. Fine motor skills require little actual movement but require precision and control of fine muscle activities involving the manipulation of tools or objects. The experiments conducted in this laboratory practicum have explored principles of fine motor control in an experimental setting to assess critical factors associated with learning new fine motor skills. Skilled motor performance requires an organized sequence of movements associated with temporal organization. Other components of fine motor skills include accuracy and consistency of performance to produce purposeful activity. Learning may be defined as a change in behaviour that results from experience and practice; it is not an innate behavour. Learning is generally assessed by evaluating changes in performance. Performance may be defined as observable behaviour. Important measurements of learning include rate of response, error, reminiscence, and trials. The most important assessment tool of learning is retention, which involves the ability to perform after a period in which no practice has occurred. One purpose of this experimental study involved a determination of whether learning is facilitated by practice trials that are administered in a blocked or in a distributed pattern. This was assessed by conducting repeated trials on the acquisition of fine motor skills required to draw objects as viewed only through a mirror. The trials were administered either in succession with only a 5 second interval or in a distributed mode in which a 60 second interval elapsed between successive trials. A second purpose of this experiment was to determine whether learning an activity using the dominant hand in an altered visual-motor setting has translational ability extending to performance by the other hand. This question was evaluated by determining whether practice trials of mirror tracing produced an enhanced ability to perform this fine motor activity with the non-dominant hand. Each of these experimental protocols was designed to address critical issues that relate to the learning processes associated with the acquisition of fine motor skills. Materials and Methods Experiment A: Mirror-drawing task Participants A total of 4 participants were enrolled in this experiment. The ages ranged between 18 and 20 years and all were judged to possess normal range fine motor capabilities. The study participants were randomly divided into two groups, each containing 1 participants. Within each group, one person was designated the “experimenter” and a second person was the “timer”. The experimenter guided the participants by providing the instructions for the assignment. The timer recorded the time for each trial and each inter-trial rest interval (it is) between successive trials. One participant was given the massed practice condition and a second participant was given the distributed practice condition. Procedure Participants in both groups were asked to trace around a star shaped figure while drawing in a mirror. The object was placed such that it could only be viewed by the study participant through the mirror. Each participant was provided with a pencil, paper, a mirror and a star shaped figure for tracing purposes. The participant was instructed to close his eyes and the experimenter placed the tip of the pencil on the point of the star marked as the start position. The experimenter gave the command “ready”. Two seconds later, the experimenter gave the “Go” command. The participant immediately opened his eyes and started to draw around the star pattern in a clockwise direction keeping the pencil mark within the borders of the star for 60 seconds (timed by the timer) attempting to keep the pencil within the star’s borders. If the pencil crossed the border the participant was required to draw back to the point where the pencil crossed and continue drawing from that point. When 60 seconds have elapsed, the experimenter gave a “stop” command and the participant must immediately stopped drawing. In the massed condition, once the sheet was replaced with a fresh one the “ready” command was given to the participant, followed by the “Go” command as soon as the 5 second ITI was over. In the distributed condition the ITI was 60 seconds. During this period the participant was provided with some reading material. This procedure was repeated 5 times for each experimental condition. Apparatus The equipment included a pencil a mirror, a star-shaped figure attached to paper for tracing purposes, a stopwatch. Retention Test: transfer test trial When the 5 trials were completed, the participants relaxed for 10 minutes and then another trial was conducted in the same way as described above. This comprised the transfer test trial. Data recording. For each trial the distance that the participant drew around the star pattern was measured and recorded ignoring marks outside the boundary of the star. The number of times the pen strayed outside the star border was recorded to provide an error score. Experiment B: Procedure Using the same procedure as described for experiment A, the practice subject drew around a star pattern with their non-dominant hand for 60 seconds. Following this trial, a 2 minute rest was taken before moving on to the next step. Practice subjects followed the procedure for the distributed practice condition described for experiment A up to and including step 6 with the participant drawing with their dominant hand. The participants completed 5 trials. After a 2 minute break test the participant again using the non-dominant hand. The control subjects rested for a duration equivalent to the practice and rest period between the two tests of the non-dominant hand (i.e. for the practice subjects). Participants Study participants were divided into a practice group and a control group. Control subjects performed the task two times only (with the non-dominant hand). Practice subjects conducted the experiment with the dominant hand for 5 practice trials before drawing the figure with the non-dominant hand. Results Experiment A was designed to determine whether the duration of the interval between subsequent practice trials affected performance in a retention test. In this study, the independent variable was the interval between practice trials and the dependent variable was the performance measurement. The results of this experiment indicated that the 5 second interval produced a better performance result in the retention test, as shown in Table 1 and Figure 1. The idea is that if inter-trial interval duration affects learning, then the affects of this learning should be demonstrated in the retention test. The mean distance was greater for this group (5 cm) versus 3 cm for the group that received a 60 second interval between practice trials. The inter-trial interval also was observed to affect performance during the repeated trial session as the 5 second massed behaviour group performed better overall during this portion of the experiment as well. Figure 2 shows that these data were consistent with the error measurement recordings, as the massed performance behaviour group showed a lower average error rate than the distributed performance group. 5sec ITI Distance (cm) 60 sec ITI Distance (cm) Error 60 sec ITI Error 5 sec ITI Trial 1 5 Trial 1 3 2 1 Trial 2 3 Trial 2 3.5 4 2 Trial 3 4.5 Trial 3 4 5 2 Trial 4 4.5 Trial 4 2.5 5 1 Trial 5 5.5 Trial 5 4 4 2 Trail 6 5 Trial 6 3 6 1 mean 4.58 3.33 4.33 1.5 S.D. 1.506 1.9 Table 1. Data summary for experiment A. The results for 5 consecutive practice trials are shown. Distance (cm) measures the overall length of the traced image within the timed interval. The error measurement indicates the number of times per trial that the pencil went over the line out of boundary of the figure to be copied. Trial 6 is the retention test result produced 10 minutes after the completion of the individual practice trials. . Figure 1. Data measurements for experiment A. Series 1 represents the massed practice group results, whilst series 2 represents the distributed practice group data. The numbers on the X-axis are the trial #. Figure 2. Error measurements recorded for experiment A. Error measurements were based on the number of stray pencil marks recorded out of boundary in the traced figure. Series 1 represents the data for the massed practice interval group, whilst series 2 represents the distributed practice interval group data. The results for experiment B are shown in Table 2 and Figure 3. These data indicate that the practice group that traced the design through the mirror reflection with the dominant hand before attempting to do so with the non-dominant hand did a better job than the control group who received no prior practice before attempting to trace the figure with the non-dominant hand. These data are also supported by the results shown in Table 3and Figure 4. The error produced by out of boundary lines in the drawings was greater for the control group than the practice group which is consistent with the length measurements recorded for these two groups. Figure 3. Results for experiment B. Length measurements for the practice group (series1) and the control group (series 2) for the non-dominant hand image tracing experiment. The practice group recived practice traning with the dominant hand prior to testing the performance of the non-dominant hand. . Figure 4. Error measurements recorded in experiment B. The error measurement was based on the number of stray marks outside the figure boundary. Distance (cm) error Practice group 5.5 2 Control group 3.5 4 Table 3. Data summary for practice and control groups in experiment B. The distance (cm) represents that length of the figure traced. The error measurement indicates the number of out of boundary stray marks were recorded for each of the groups. Discussion and Conclusions The data presented in this experimental study suggested that massed practice optimizes learning in that the retention test produced better results for the experimental condition in which the experimental subject was given very short 5 second intervals between successive repetitive practice trials. The data were consistent, in that the greater length measurement and the lower error rate indicated that the massed practice produced an optimized learning experience. The experiment indicated that the short interval component did not appear to be associated with fatigue, since the individual trial performance data were also higher for this group. Research studies conducted in this area of learned motor behaviour indicate that massed practice appears to be better suited for some tasks and distributed practice may optimize learning for other types of motor tasks (Neath and Surprenant, 2003). For continuous skills such as bicycling, research suggests that distributed practice may be more beneficial to learning motor skills, but for discrete activities or tasks such as throwing a ball, massed practice strategies may be more effective. Other studies of children with motor disabilities suggest that distributed practice may be more effective (Shute and Gawlick, 1995). The results from experiment B indicated that practice use of the dominant hand in fine motor tasks may enhance the performance of the non-dominant hand. Similar results were obtained in a research study of grip force dexterity transfer from the dominant to the non-dominant hand (Kai and Watari, 2005). This study indicated that there was a transfer of motor performance to the non-dominant hand consistent with the experimental results obtained in this laboratory experiment. Moreover, brain research studies indicate that PET(positron emission scanning) spectra indicate that there is an activity connection within the brain that correlates with inter-manual transfer of motor function. In conclusion, these experiments have indicated that the learning component of motor performance may be affected by the manner in which the training is carried out. This study indicated that varying the time intervals between practice may have a significant effect on retention, which is a critical measurement of learning. In this study, the massed practice approach yielded a better result. To confirm this finding, it would be necessary to repeat the study using additional subjects. The results of experiment B indicated that practice using the dominant hand can affect the acquisition of fine motor skills by the non-dominant hand. This finding was corroborated with similar research studies in this area. References Kai, S., and Watari, K. (2005). Intermanual transfer of effects of motor learning from the dominant to non-dominant hand using a grip force retaining task. Journal of physical therapy science, Vol. 17 (2), 57-61. Neath, I., and Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Human memory: An introduction to research, data, and theory (2ndEd.). Toronto: Thompson/Wadsworth. Shute, V., Gawlick, L. (1995). Practice Effects on Skil Acquisition, Learning Outcome Retention, and Sensitivity to Relearning. Human Factors, Vol. 37, 112-123. Read More