تاثیر یادگیری آشکار و پنهان بر قابلیت شناسایی خطا : آزمون فرضیه بازنمایی مبتنی بر نمونه

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی،تهران، ایران

2 استادیار تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه دامغان، دامغان، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه و هدف: تحقیقات مختلف نشان داده­اند که افراد می­توانند در یک محیط قاعده­مند بدون توجه هوشیارانه یاد بگیرند. این نوع یادگیری، یادگیری پنهان، در مقابل نوع مرسوم یادگیری، یادگیری آشکار قرار دارد. هدف از این تحقیق، مقایسه تاثیر یادگیری آشکار و پنهان بر اکتساب و یادداری تکلیف زمانبندی پیش بین و قابلیت شناسایی خطا بود.
روش شناسی: تحقیق حاضر از نوع نیمه تجربی است. تعداد 30 دانشجوی 23-25 ساله بطور داوطلب در تحقیق شرکت کردند که به طور تصادفی در3 گروه آزمایشی قرار گرفتند. به گروه یادگیری آشکار درباره وجود توالی تکراری در بخش میانی (در بین دو بخش تصادفی) اطلاعاتی داده­شد. گروه یادگیری پنهان بدون تکلیف ثانویه همین تکلیف را بدون آگاهی از وجود توالی تکراری در بخش میانی اجرا کردند. به گروه سوم (یادگیری پنهان با تکلیف ثانویه) همزمان با اجرای تکلیف یک تکلیف ثانویه داده­شد. آزمودنی­ها پس از شرکت در پیش­آزمون به مدت 3 روز و در هر روز 15 بلوک 18 کوششی را تمرین کردند و سپس در آزمون یادداری شرکت کردند. داده­ها با روش تحلیل واریانس عاملی مرکب (3 گروه 3 آزمون) تحلیل ­شد.
یافته ­ها: یافته­های تحقیق نشان داد که در تمام گروه­ها، بخش تکراری میانی نسبت به حداقل یکی از بخش­های تصادفی تفاوت معنی­داری دارد (0001/0p=­). همچنین بین گروه­ها در خطای مطلق تفاوت معنی­داری وجود ­نداشت (393/0p=). با وجود این­که آزمودنی­ها در گروه­های پنهان از وجود توالی­های تکراری اطلاع نداشتند اما به اندازه گروه آشکار یاد گرفتند. نتایج همچنین نشان داد که گروه آشکار در قابلیت شناسایی خطا نسبت به هر دو گروه پنهان به طور معنی داری بهتر عمل کرده است(004/0p=).
بحث و نتیجه­ گیری: این نشان می­دهد که تجربیات اجرای حرکتی، سطح یادگیری حرکتی فرد را افزایش می­دهد، حتی وقتی که افراد از اجزاء تکلیف که باعث تغییر می­شوند، بی اطلاع باشند. لذا بر طبق یادگیری پنهان افراد می­توانند عملکردشان را به وسیله­ی این فرض که آن­ها بازنمایی­های مبتنی بر نمونه را کسب کرده­اند، درک کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The effect of implicit and explicit learning on Error Detection Capability: Testing of representation based of sample hypothesis.

چکیده [English]

Introduction and Purpose: Different researches have illustrated that people learn in systematic environment without conscious attention. This learning, implicit learning, is opposite of explicit learning. The purpose of this research was comparison effect implicit and explicit learning on acquisition and retention Coincidence Anticipation Timing Task and Error Detection Capability.
Methodology: This study is semi-experimental. The number of 30 subjects randomly in three groups was tested. The first group (explicit learning) about the existence of repetitive sequences in the middle section (between two random section), information was given. The second group (implicit learning without secondary task) the same task without the knowledge of the existence of repetitive sequences in the middle played. Other group (implicit learning with secondary task) simultaneously performing a secondary task. Subjects after pre-test train 3 days and very day 15 blocks consist of 18 efforts and then participated in the retention test. Secondary task included remember a number of frequency-specific sound tone that after the end of each block by subjects in a particular location on the page were recorded.Data has been analyzed by statistical methods: MANOVA and TOKY test.
Results: The results showed in acquisition and retention tests there is significant difference between middle repetitive section and at least one of random sections in all groups(p=0.0001). Also there was significant difference between groups in Absolut Error (p=0.393). However subjects in implicit groups don’t aware of repetitive sequence but they learned as much as explicit group. And also we found better performance in explicit group rather than other groups in error detection capability (p= 0.004).
Discussion:This showed that motor performance experiences, increases motor learning levelwhile subjects is not aware from components task. Thus, according to implicit learning, subjects can perception their performance by representation based of sample.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Implicit learning
  • explicit learning
  • task Coincidence Anticipation Timing
  • error detection capability
##Wulf, G. and C.Weigilt(1997). “Instructions about physical principle in learning a complex motor skill: to tell or not to tell.”Research quarterly for exercise and sport68(4): 392 – 367##Miyawaki, K. (2005). “The influence of the response–stimulus interval on implicit and explicit learning of stimulus sequence.”Psychological Research70(4): 262 – 272##Estevens, A., et al. (2007). “Implicit learning, executive function and hedonic activity in chronic polydrug abusers, currently abstinentpolydrug abusers and controls.” Psychological Research102(6): 937- 946##Khyrandish, A., et al. (2009). “Influence of contextual interference in condition implicit and explicit learning in pursuit skill.”Olympic Journal,17(3): 75-86 [Persian]##Hardy, T., et al. (2007). “Implicit learning of an embedded regularity in children using a serial reaction time task in a virtual reality environment.”Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology Supplement29(2-3): 109 -119 ##Magill, R.A. (1998). “Knowledge is more than we can talk about: Implicit learning in motor skill acquisition.”Research quarterly for exercise and sport69(2): 104-110.##Martini, R., et al. (2007).“Implicit learning of an embedded regularity in children using a serial reaction time task in a virtual reality environment.”Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology29: 109##Seitz, R.J. andP. E.Roland. (1991). “Learning of sequential finger movements in man: a combined kinematic and positron emission tomography (PET) study.” Eur J Neurosci4(2): 154-165##Sherwood, D. E. andT. D. Lee. (2003). “Schematheory: Critical review and implications for the role of cognition in a new theory of motor learning.”Research Quarterly for exercise and sport74(4): 376 – 382 ##Shanks, D. R., et al. (2005). “Attentional load and implicit sequence learning.” PsychologicalResearch69(5-6): 369–382##Bloedel, J. R., et al. (1996). The acquisition of motor behavior in vertebrates. Cambridge, Mass: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press,A Bradford Book:363-386##Schacter, D. L. (1996). Searching for memory: The Brain, the Mind, and the Past. New York,Basic Books##Knowlton, B. J., et al. (1996). “A neostriatal habit learning system in humans.” Science273(5280): 1399 – 1402##Schmidt, R. and T. D.  Lee. (2008). Motor control and learning. Edition 4, Translate: HemayatTalab, R. and Ghasemi, A. Tehran, Elm and Harkat.##Lee, T. D., et al. (1994). “Cognitive effort and motor learning.”Quest46(3): 328 – 344##Maxwell, P. J. and R. S.Masters.(2009). “Analogy versus explicit learning of a modified basketball shooting task: Performance and kinematic outcomes.” Journal of Sports Sciences27(2): 179 –191##Abdoli, B., et al. (2004). “Comparison effect of implicit and explicit learning on serial reaction time.” Harkat19: 23-40 [Persian]##Masters, R.S., et al. (2008). “Implicit Motor Learning and Complex Decision Making in Time-Constrained Environments.”Journal of Motor Behavior40(1): 71-79##Poolton, J. M., et al. (2007). “The development of a culturally appropriate analogy for implicit motor learning in a chinese population.”The sport psychologist21(4): 375-382.##Sekiya, H. (2007). “Contextual interference in implicit and explicit motor learning.”Perceptual and motor skills, 103(2) :333-343##Luis, J. and A. Gustavo. (2007). “Implicit sequence learning in a search task.”The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology61(11): 1650-1657##Poolton, J.M., et al.(2006). “The influence of analogy learning on decision-making in table tennis: Evidence from behavioural data.”Psychology of sport and exercise7(6): 677-688##Shea, J. B. and R. L. Morgan.(1979). “Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill.”J ExpPsychol Hum Learn5(2):179–187.##Nissen, M. J. and P.Bullemer. (1987). “Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures.”Cognitive Psychology19(1):1-32.##Abdoli, B., et al. (2011). “Comparison effect of learning implicit and explicit learning with different levels of cognitive load on learning task Coincidence Anticipation Timing.”Motor behavior and sport psychology9: 29-44 [Persian]##Orrell, A. J., et al. (2006).  “Implicit motor learning of a balancing task.”Gait & Posture23(1): 9 – 16##koedijker, J.M., et al. (2008). “Table tennis performance following explicit and analogy learning over 10,000 repetitions.”International Journal of Sport Psychology39(3): 237-256.##Sekiya, H. and K. Fukuchi. (2004). “Influence of rule complexity on implicit and explicit learning of a tracking task.”Journal of sport and exercise26: 165-167##Shin, Y. W., et al. (2005). “The influence of complexes on implicit learning.”Journal of Analytical Psychology50(2): 175–190##Eiatam, B. and R. R. Hassin. (2008). “Nonconscious Goal Pursuit in Novel Environments: The Case of Implicit Learning.”Psychological Science19(3): 261 -267##Seger, C.A. (1994). “Implicit learning.”Psychological Bulletin115(2): 163 – 196.##Green, T. D. andJ. H. Flowers. (1991). “Implicit versus explicit learning processes in a probabilistic, continuous fine – motor catching task.”Journal of motor behavior23(4): 293 – 300.##Jimenez, L. and G. A. Vazquez. (2008). “Implicit sequence learning in a search task.” Journal of experimental psychology61(11): 1650–1657.##Hoyndorf, A. and H. Haider. (2009). “The “Not Letting Go” phenomenon: accuracy instructions can impair behavioral and metacognitive effects of implicit learning.” Psychological