This study investigated simultaneous treatments in contextual interference (blocked and random practice) and their effect on the process of learning four tennis shots. 8 tennis players participated in the research, which was carried out in two phases. The first phase involved a 3-wk. period of 12 sessions with 192 practice tennis shots per session for each tennis player. The second phase comprised 4 retention tests carried out at 48 hr. and 2, 4, and 6 weeks following the learning phase. This phase consisted of evaluating the retention of the skills that had been practiced during the learning phase. The results indicated an improvement in the quality of shots for both practice conditions during the learning phase. Differences in retention appeared relative to differences in the type of practice conditions (random or blocked) in which the skill was learned and also depended on the type of shot and the time that had elapsed since the learning period.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonJ. R. (1980) Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
2.
BradyF. (2004) Contextual interference: A meta-analytic study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99, 116–126.
3.
BuxtonC. E. (1940) Retroaction and gains in motor learning: III. Evaluation of results. Journal of General Psychology, 22, 309–320.
4.
CzyzS.StaszakM. (2004) Contextual interferences and motor learning transfer and retention in children. Human Movement, 1, 13–18.
5.
Del ReyP.LiuX.SimpsonK. J. (1994) Does retroactive inhibition influence contextual interference effects?Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65, 120–126.
6.
Del ReyP.WughalterE.DuboisD.CarnesM. (1982) Effects of contextual interference and retention intervals on transfer. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 54, 467–476.
7.
FarrowD.MaschetteW. (1997) The effects of contextual interference on children learning forehand tennis groundstroke. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 33, 47–67.
8.
GoodeS.MagillR. A. (1986) Contextual interference effects in learning three badminton serves. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 57, 308–314.
9.
GreenS. G.SherwoodD. E. (1999) Movement time, practice structure and temporal error detection capability in quick reversal movements. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21, S51.
10.
HainsA.BaerD. (1989) Interaction effects in multi-element designs: Inevitable, desirable, and ignorable. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 57–69.
11.
HebertE. P.LandinD.SolmonM. A. (1996) Practice schedule effects on the performance and learning of low- and high-skilled students: An applied study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 52–58.
12.
ImminkM. A.WrightD. L. (1999) Contextual interference: Motor response programming under random and blocked practice. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21, S60.
13.
JarusT.GoveroverY. (1999) Effects of contextual interference and age on acquisition, retentio, and transfer of motor skill. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 437–447.
14.
LageG. M.VieiraM. M.PalharesL. R.UgrinowitschH.BendaR. N. (2006) Practice schedules and number of skills as contextual interference factors in the learning of positioning timing tasks. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 50, 185–200.
15.
LandinD.HebertE. P.MenickelliJ.GrishamW. (2003) The contextual interference continuum: What level of interference is best for adult novices?Journal of Human Movement Studies, 44, 19–35.
16.
LeeT. D.MagillR. A. (1983) The locus of contextual interference in motor skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 94, 730–746.
17.
LeeT. D.SimonD. A. (2004) Contextual interference. In WilliamsA. M.HodgsN. I. (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory, and practice. London: Routledge, Pp. 29–44.
18.
LiY.VacziM. (1999) The locus of contextual interference effect: Motor or perceptual?Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21, S76.
19.
MagillR. A.HallK. G. (1990) A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241–289.
20.
MagnusonC.WrightD. (2004) Random practice can facilitate the learning of tasks that have different relative time structures. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 197–202.
21.
MaslovatD.ChuaR.LeeT. D.FranksI. M. (2004) Contextual interference: Single task versus multitask learning. Motor Control, 8, 213–233.
22.
MeeuwsenH. J.MagillR. A. (1991) Spacing of repetitions versus contextual interference effects in motor skill learning. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 20, 213–228.
23.
MorenoF. J.ÁvilaF.DamasJ. S.GarcíaJ. A.LuísV.ReinaR.RuizA. (2003) Contextual interference in learning precision skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97, 121–128.
24.
OllisS.ButtonC. H.FairweatherM. (2005) The influence of professional expertise and task complexity upon the potency of the contextual interference effect. Acta Psychologica, 118, 229–244.
25.
OverdorfV.SchweighardtR.PageS.McGrathR. (2004) Mental and physical practice schedules in acquisition and retention of novel timing skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99, 51–62.
26.
PigottR. E.ShapiroD. C. (1984) Motor schema: The structure of the variability session. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 55, 41–45.
27.
PollockB. J.LeeT. D. (1997) Dissociated contextual interference effects in children and adults. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 851–858.
28.
RussellD. M.NewellK. M. (2007) How persistent and general is the contextual interference effect?Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78, 318–327.
29.
SchmidtR. A.LeeT. D. (1999) Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. (3rd ed.) Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
30.
SheaJ. B.MorganR. L. (1979) Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of motor skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 179–187.
31.
SheaJ. B.ZimnyS. T. (1983) Context effects in memory and learning movement information. In MagillR. A. (Ed.), Memory and control of action. Amsterdam: North Holland, Pp. 345–366.
32.
SherwoodD. E. (1996) The benefits of random variable practice for spatial accuracy and error detection in a rapid aiming task. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 35–43.
33.
ShewokisP. A.Del ReyP.SimpsonK. J. (1998) A test of retroactive inhibition as an explanation of contextual interference. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69, 70–74.
34.
ShewokisP. A.KlopferD. (2000) Some blocked practice schedules yield better learning than random practice schedules with anticipation timing tasks. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 38, 57–73.
35.
SmithP. J.PennG. L. (1999) The effect of number of practice trials on the contextual interference effect for skill variations with similar relative timing characteristics. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21, S101.
36.
Ste-MarieD.ClarkS. E.FindlayL.LatimerA. (2004) High levels of contextual interference enhance handwriting skill acquisition. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1, 115–126.
37.
WackerD.McMahonC.SteegeM.BergW.SassoG.MelloyK. (1990) Applications of a sequential alternating treatments design. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 333–339.
38.
WegmanE. (1999) Contextual interference effects on the acquisition and retention of fundamental motor skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 182–187.
39.
WrightD. L. (1991) The effect of type of practice on motor learning in children. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 123–134.
40.
WrightD. L.LiY.WhitacreC. (1992) The contribution of elaborative processing to the contextual interference effect. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63, 30–37.
41.
WrisbergC. A.LiuZ. (1991) The effect of contextual variety on the practice, retention, and transfer of an applied motor skill. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 406–412.
