Efeitos dos intervalos de tempo de apresentação de conhecimento de resultados (CR) na aquisição de habilidades motoras

Abstract

Knowledge of Results (KR) consists in one of the most important variables in the motor skills acquisition, it is considered inferior only to the practice. The manipulation of the temporal locus KR produces three intervals: delay KR, interval between the end of trial and the presentation of KR; post-KR, interval between the presentation of KR and the beginning of the next trial; and intertrial interval, interval from the last trial to the next one. The analysis of these intervals has been considered as a methodological problem, it because when an interval is manipulated, another one is indirectly influenced. For that reason it becomes necessary to investigate the interaction among these three intervals. Thus, he aim of this study was to investigate the effects of temporal locus of KR in the motor skills acquisition. An apparatus was used to measure the response time, it was composed by a wooden box with six containers numbered from 1 to 6, a central of control connected to a microcomputer with a response key to control both the measures of reaction time and movement time. This study consisted of acquisition phase and tests. In the acquisition phase, participants performed 30 trials of a manual positioning task, which consisted of transporting three tennis balls in a pre-defined sequence (4-2/5-3/6-1) in a criterion movement time (3,000 ms.). Ten minutes after the end of acquisition phase was applied the immediate transfer test. Twenty- four hours after the immediate transfer test was applied the delayed transfer test. In both tests were required 15 practice trials in a new movement sequence (6-1/5-3/4-2) and criterion movement time (4,000 ms.) without KR presentation. In the tests, each block of 5 trials presented a different intertrial interval to avoid any kind of advantage for a specific group. Thus, the first block of the tests consisted of a 4 seconds interval, the second block consisted of an 8 seconds de interval and the third block consisted of a 16 seconds of the intertrial interval. Ninety undergraduate students were assigned to one of nine groups (n=10): G1 with KR delay of four seconds, without post-KR and intertrial interval of four seconds; G2 without KR delay, post-KR of four seconds and intertrial interval of four seconds; G3 with KR delay of two seconds, post-KR of two seconds and intertrial interval of four seconds; G4 with KR delay of eight seconds, without post-KR and intertrial interval of eight seconds; G5 without KR, post-KR of eight seconds and intertrial interval of eight seconds; G6 with KR delay of four seconds, post-KR of four seconds and intertrial interval of eight seconds; G7 with KR delay of sixteen seconds, without post-KR and intertrial interval of sixteen seconds; G8 without KR delay, post-KR of sixteen seconds and intertrial interval of sixteen seconds; G9 with KR delay of eight seconds, post-KR of eight seconds and intertrial interval of sixteen seconds. These results indicated that the shortest intertrial intervals presented the best results indicating that the time for information processing must not be long, requiring the action of the short- term memory.