Measurement of functional task difficulty during motor learning: What level of difficulty corresponds to the optimal challenge point?

被引:53
作者
Akizuki, Kazunori [1 ]
Ohashi, Yukari [2 ]
机构
[1] Mejiro Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Phys Therapy, Iwatsuki Ku, Saitama, Saitama 3398501, Japan
[2] Ibaraki Prefectural Univ Hlth Sci, Dept Phys Therapy, Ami, Ibaraki 3000394, Japan
关键词
Challenge point framework; Optimal challenge point; Task difficulty; Salivary alpha-amylase; NASA-TIX; Motor learning; SALIVARY ALPHA-AMYLASE; ANAEROBIC THRESHOLD; CARDIOVASCULAR ASSESSMENT; SUBJECTIVE WORKLOAD; ATTENTIONAL DEMANDS; MENTAL WORKLOAD; DETERMINANTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.humov.2015.07.007
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
The relationship between task difficulty and learning benefit was examined, as was the measurability of task difficulty. Participants were required to learn a postural control task on an unstable surface at one of four different task difficulty levels. Results from the retention test showed an inverted-U relationship between task difficulty during acquisition and motor learning. The second-highest level of task difficulty was the most effective for motor learning, while learning was delayed at the most and least difficult levels. Additionally, the results indicate that salivary a-amylase and the performance dimension of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) are useful indices of task difficulty. Our findings suggested that instructors may be able to adjust task difficulty based on salivary alpha-amylase and the performance dimension of the NASA-TLX to enhance learning. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:107 / 117
页数:11
相关论文
共 44 条
[21]  
Hart Sandra G., 2006, Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, V50, P904, DOI [10.1177/15419312060500090, 10.1177/154193120605000909, DOI 10.1177/154193120605000909]
[22]   MEASURING SUBJECTIVE WORKLOAD - WHEN IS ONE SCALE BETTER THAN MANY [J].
HENDY, KC ;
HAMILTON, KM ;
LANDRY, LN .
HUMAN FACTORS, 1993, 35 (04) :579-601
[23]   COMPARISON OF 4 SUBJECTIVE WORKLOAD RATING-SCALES [J].
HILL, SG ;
IAVECCHIA, HP ;
BYERS, JC ;
BITTNER, AC ;
ZAKLAD, AL ;
CHRIST, RE .
HUMAN FACTORS, 1992, 34 (04) :429-439
[24]  
Kantowitz B.H., 1988, MENTAL STATE ESTIMAT, P179
[25]  
Kantowitz B. H., 2000, P HUM FACT ERG SOC A, V44, P3, DOI [https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120004402121, DOI 10.1177/154193120004402121]
[26]  
KERR B, 1975, J MOTOR BEHAV, V7, P15, DOI 10.1080/00222895.1975.10735009
[27]   COGNITIVE EFFORT AND MOTOR LEARNING [J].
LEE, TD ;
SWINNEN, SP ;
SERRIEN, DJ .
QUEST, 1994, 46 (03) :328-344
[28]   An assessment of the attention demands during random- and blocked-practice schedules [J].
Li, YH ;
Wright, DL .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 53 (02) :591-606
[29]  
Marteniuk R.G., 1976, INFORM PROCESSING MO
[30]  
MILLER GA, 1956, PSYCHOL REV, V63, P81, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.343