Developmental aspects of motor short term memorysummit.sfu.ca/system/files/iritems1/3276/b12244144.pdf · C J / tionale CANADIAN THESES . ---- ---- TH~SES CANAOIE~NES ON MICROFICHE

C

J /

tionale CANADIAN THESES . ---- ----

T H ~ S E S CANAOIE~NES ON MICROFICHE

S U R - I 1 7 C R ~ I C H E - ~ - - - --

TOHA T CORLET-~ NAME OF AUTHOR/NOM DE L'AUTEUR

DEGREE FOR WHICH THESIS WAS mESENT€D/ GRADE POUR LEQUEL CETTE THE+SE FUT P R ~ S E N T ~ E P h.3.

YEAR THIS DEGREE CONFERRED/ANN~E O'OBTENTICWY DE CE GRADE 1980

Permission is hereby granted t a the NATIONA$-IBRARY OF L'autorisation est, par la presents, sfcord+ d la BISLIOTH(-

CANADA to microfilm this thesis and to lend or sell copies QUE NATIONALE DU CANADA de microfilmes cette these et

of the film. de pr6ter ou de vendre des exemplaires du film. , d *

The author reserves other publication rights, and neither the L'autew se rkerve les autrss 'droits de .. publication; ni la

thesis nor extensid extracts from i t may be printed or other- thesen; de lo&s extraits de cellerci ne doivent &re imprimes

wise reproduced withoutgthe author's written perrnissim. ou autrement repraluits sans l'autwisation &rite 'de I'adeur.

+ National Library of Canada Biblioth&que nationale du Canada C Collections Development Branch Direction du developpement d& collections

- -- - *&ia*fb- m- - - - -- S e F & t + & & & s c a n & @ m e ~ - - - -- - --

Microfiche Service sur microfiche

-- -- - -- -- - - -

---I f

AVlS

Y h q u a t t t g o f ~ h l s - r n ~ t r e i s - m e p e n d e n t - - ta quatie de c e t t m n i n ~ &penrtgrihchmtde---- upon the quality of the original thesis submitted for la qualit6 de la tfikse soumise au microTilmage. Nous microfilming. Every effort has been made to ensure avons tout fait pour assurer une qualit6 superieure the highest quality of reproduction possible. de reprodu'ction.

C "

4f-pagesare-missing, contact the u~iversity whrch , = Si l manque des pages, veuillez communiquer - i-

granted the degree. - avec I'universite qui a confer6 le grade. i i c, * i

Some pages may have inairiinct print especially 1

La qualite d'impression de certaines pages peut if the original pages were typed with a poor typewrit@ laisser i dksirer, surtout si les pages originales ont kt6 , ribbon or if ttresuniversity sent us a poor photocdpy dactylographiees B I'aide d'un ruban us6 ou si I'univer-

LI site nous a fait parvenir -une photocopie de mauvaise qualite.

Previously copyrighted materials (journal articles, , Les documents qui font deja I'objet d'un droit published tests, etc.) are not filmed. d'auteur (articles de revue, examens publies, etc.) ne j

sont pas microf ilmbs. 5

- - i Reproduction in full or in part of this film is gov- La reproduction, 'm6me partielle, de ce microfilm

erned by the Canadian Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1970, est soumise a la Loi canadienne sur le droit d'auteur, c. C-30. Please read the authorization formstwhich SRC 1970, c. C-30. Veuillez prendre connaissance des

- accompany this thesis. formules d'aqorisation qui accompagnent cette these.

% - d

P

THIS DISSERTATION LA THESE A ETE HAS BEEN MICROFILMED MICROFILM~E TELLE QUE EXACTLY AS RECEIVED NOUS L'AVONS RECUE*

DEVELOPUEITAL ASPECTS OF

BOTOR SHORT TERH HEl4ORY

John Thomas Corlett

B . S c W r r s f , B r o c k UPieersity, t9WA - -

R. Sc. (Kines io logy ) , Simfm Praser u n i v e r s i t y , 1977

A THESIS SUBMITTED II PARTIAL PULPILLflEIT OF i

THE REQUIREHEITS F O B THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

In The Department

f John Thomas C b r l e t t ,979

S I ~ O H PR&B U B ~ V B R S I T Y

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - -- - - - -- - -

All rights reserved. Phis t h e s i s may not be reproduced in w h o l e or ira part by photocopy or other m a n s v i thont - - -- - - - --- -

permission of the author,

w

PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE --- -

I he reby g r a n t t o Simon F r a s e r u n i v e r s i t y t h e r i g h t t o lend

my t h e s i s or d i s s e r t a t i o n ( t h e t i t l e of which i s shown below) t o u s e r e - .

of t h e Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , and t o make p a r t i a l o r s i n g l e

/. c o p i e s on ly f o r - s u c h u s e r s o r i n r e sponse t o a r e q u e s t from t h e l i b r a r y

- - - - - -

of any o t h e r u n i v e r s i t y , o r o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n , on i t s 'own - - - - - -

behalf o r f o r one of i t s u s e r s . 1 f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t permiss ion f o r

m u l t i p l e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d

by me o r t h e Dean of Graduate S t u d i e s . It is unders tood t h a t copying

or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be al lowed

wi thou t my w r i t t e n permiss ion ,

, f

T i t l e of T h e s i s / D i s s e r t a t i o n :

Author :

( s i g n a t u r e )

(name ) 9

C

BASE: John Thomas Corlett U

DBGREE: Doctor of Philosophy I \ _ _

TITLE OF THESIS: Developmental ~ s ~ & t s O f lotor Short Tera Memory

Chairman: Dr. E.V. BanisQr

- - T - S . Dictinson

- Senior Supervisor

* ~ r . 6.1. Diesert

Dr. Vi to l o d i g l i a n s D e p a r t m e n t Of Psychology

S i m o n Praser Uni rers i ty

--- - _ D r . Ian Oilliars External Bxaniner

Department of Kinesiology Univers i ty of wate4loo

- - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date Approred: Augus t 16th. 1979,

Iinety school children, 30 in each of t h r e e a g e groups, were

t e s t e d u s i n g a s l i d e bar for their ability to reproduce linear

arm p o s i t 1 oning movements i n a s h o r t t e r a memory paradigm. Three

separate experiments mere conducted using t h e sa&e s u b j e c t s i n - --- - -

e a c h experiment .

The f i r s t experiment tested the effects of Roveaent length,

r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l l e n g t h , and available movement cues on

reproduction of a c r i t e r i o n movement. Subjects reproduced longer

movements with g r e a t e r a b s o l u t e error than shorter o n e s in all

age groups: the effect of movement length on absolute error was

g r e a t e r on t h e youngest children. A d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n criterion

reprodt l c t ion a s measored by incraasimg a b s o l u t e error aldo.

accorred as the length of the r e t e n t i o n interval i n c r e a s e d from 0

t o 30, s e c o n d s . Again, t h e effect was g r e a t e r for younger children

t h a n for older o n e s , Having dis tance and Xocation in format ion

a v a i l a b l e produced s l i g h t l y less abso lute error than reproduction

w i t h location i n f o r m a t i o n a l o n e for a12 age groups. hs measured - by c o n s t a n t error, a l l age groups d i s p l a j o d a tendency t o

a - tmdar shoot-cr%teri&-tot%mnts amtlr-m&em~*hgg-a~td~--~- -p---p

T h e second experiment tested the ability af c h i l d r e n t o

exercise cogni t ive c o n t r o l over motor behavionr i n three

a n d i t ions of task r e l e v a n t and task irrelevan't i n f o r n a t i o n .

Relative t o control c o n d i t i o n s i n v h i c h no i r r e l e v a n t information e.

uas p r e s e n t , sub-jects of a l l ages were affected by a m u l t i p l e

t r i a l s design in which no directed f o r g e t t i n g was possible,

Younger subjects were .ore affected than o l d e r ones suggesting an

6 increased capacity for cognitive c o n t r o l in o l d e r c h i l d r e n . I n a

s i n g l e trials des ign Frt vhich d i r e c t e d forgettiag was p o s s i b l e , -X

older subjects were capable of exert ing a greater degree of

cognitive c o n t r b l than younger ones. decrement i n performance

r ~ l a t i v e to controls at a l l ages was evident, however, i n d i c a t i n g

. t h a t e v e n t h e o l d e s t subjects a r e h i g h l y s u s c e p t i b l e to proact ive

i~ terference .

The t h i r d experiment showed t h a t a l l subjects a r e a f f e c t e d

by the interpolated a c t i v i t i e s i n a r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e

pyadig. osing absolute error a s t h e dependent measure. Mo t

significant interaction between i n t g r f e r e n c e and age was showp

ixfdicati n g t h a t older and younger s u b j e c t s are equa l1 y a f f e c t e d . d '

I n a d d i t i o n , resalts concerning t h e effect of increased o r i g i n a l

learning on retroact5ve ZnterTerence u s r e ~biained: &owever, bl

s n b f e c t s in h i g t or ig inal fearsirrg graprpq pro&nceh greater

i n t e r f e r e n c e effects than t h o ~ e i n loar o r i g i n a l learning grovps.

The r e s u l t s are d f s c u s s e d in relation to botil the basic - conc3pts of sotor skills learning and performance ifereloped with

m

adul t s . In general. it is concluded that those concepts are

parsimonious ones, holding true for the children tested in this

study. Certain results are discussed in the contex t of possible

proactive interference inherent in the experimental designs.

Practical appltcations t o the teaching of motor skills are also

d i s c u s s e d .

T a b l e Of contehts Z

Approval Page ii

Abstract Page iii

List O f Tablas i Page v i i i .

L i s t O f f i g u r e s Page ir

L i s t O f Appendices . t

Page x

CHAPTER 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n Page 1

cBbPTER 2 Experiment 2 u'

2a. I n t r o d u c t i o n Page 25

i, Boveaent Length Page 25 ii, R e t e n t i o n Interval Page 27

iii. flovement Cues Page 28 i v . Dependent Error n e b s u r e s Page 31

2b. Experimental Des ign and Uethods

- 1

i . Hypotheses Page 3 3 f

ii, Subjects Page 33 iii. Bpparatus Page 3 5

i v . Design and k n a l y s i s . Page 38 V. Procedure .Page 39

2c. Results Page 43 - 1

2d. D cussion Y - i. 45veaent Length page. 55

ii. Retention Interval Page 64 iii, govement Cues Pag.0 7 1

v Interaction Effects a Page 7 7 - .

CHAPTER 3 Experiment 2

3a. ~ n t r o d u c t i o n page 8 5 \

CHAPTER 4

CHAPTER 5

Bibl iography

v i i

3b. Experimental Design and Methods

i, Hypotheses Page 8 8 ii, S u b j e c t s Page 88

iii, Apparatus Page 8 9 i v . Design and A n a l y s i s Page 8 9

v. Procedure Page 9 1

3 Resu l t s Page 92

3d. - ~ i s c a s s i a n Page 98

Exper iment 3

4a. Introduction Page 104

4b. Experimental Design and Bethods

i. H y p o t h e s e s Page 107 ii, Subjects Page 108

iif . Apparatus Page 108 iv. Design and b n a l y s i s Page 108

V. P r o c e d u r e Page 109

Qc, Results Page 110

4d. D ~ S C U S S ~ O ~

i. ~etrortctive Interference Effects Page 117

ii, O r i g i n a l L e a r n i n g Effects Page 119

Gsneral Discussion Page 121

Page 128

Appendix 1 Page 137 -

P

vl

w

Q)

0

b

*d

VI 4J

ll P

. .rl

h

k

46

U

id.'

W

a

0,

*Id+

' r7

a

8s

I I

* 4 rd

ul

mu

1

WU

I c .r4

F .d

C

.d

UI ul

v) W

k @

k Q

)k

rld

dd

dr)

Pa

.Qa

tun

cda

idu

H

d

WM

E

-la

" . - Figure # Description 'of Figure * . . page *

r Y * * 7

? ~ n f o r i a t i o o Processing Model , 8 , I - >

2 Huaan ~ e r f o r m a n c e nodel . , 22 a

3 '?

37 S l i d e Bar- \

I 6, .r

4a Absolute Error v s . , Hovement Length '58 *-

46 - - - -

Constant Error vs. Flovement Length 3 9

Variable Error vs. lloveaent Length

Absolute Error v s , Retention Interval rl

c o n s t a n t Error' vs. Retention I n t e r v a l 4

Variable Error vs, Retention Interval 2

Absolute, Error v s . Movement Cues

.Constant Error v s , Movement Cues

variable Error vs. Movement Cues .

- l b s o l u t e Error rs. aorement?)cngt h ( g r o u p i n g by ref e n t i o n i ~ t e r v a l )

hbsolate Error v s . aoveoent Length (grouping b g rovement cues)

Absolute Error, vs, Proactive I n t e r f e r e n c e Design d Ccnstant E r r o r vs. Proactire Interference Design

'S , Appendix # ~

A poster io~i aa in . effects

Page

analysis of s i g n i f i c a n t in ~ x p e r i ~ e a t s 1, 2 , and 3 . 137

, &

3

CHAPTER 1

I n t r o d u c t i o n

For c e n t u r i e s , scientists h a v e been c o n c e r n e d k i t h human

s t r u c t u r e and i t s r e l a t i c n s h i p to fu .nc t$cn , F o r e x a m p l e , i n ths

e a r l y 1 6 t h century, G a l i l e o (1564-1542) a n d Borel l i (1608-1679)

uere e x p l o r i n g t h e n a t u r e o f size and human m o t i o n . L i k e t h e > . more g e n e r a l studies of h u a a n s t r u c t u r e and f u n c t i o n , the

L

' s p e c i f i c s t u d y c f . g r o w i n g c h i l d r e n a l s o h a s a l o n g history.

Between 1759 and. 1776, d e l o n t b e i l l a r d s t u d i e d the g r o w t h 4 of h i s

son ani t constructed u,hat ue ndw recognize a s growth displacement

and y e l o c i t y .?6;urves. Since then, the s t u d y of growth, or a u x o l o g y

a s i t i s c o n t e m ~ o r a r i l y c a l l e d , h a s p r o g r e s s e d g r e a t l y . The #

increased in teres t in t h e workings of t h e human b o d y inevitably'

led t o ths study of children since t h e y are a subject p p p n l a t i o n

along w h y e sost noticeable c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s the 'ra'pid chang p \

w h i c h %cur3 i n size and t h e ability 'to perfor. p h y s i c a l t a s k s .

Several e x c e l l e n t r e v i e w s Qn the general trends of p h y s i c a l

growth have been p u b l i s h e d . .Both Thompson (1942) a n d Tanner

* (1362, 1378) among others hare elucidated t h e f u n d a s e n t a l tenets

of s i z e , s h a p e , ~ r a p o r t i o a , and c o m p o s i t i o n a s t h e y are a f f e c t e d --

by c h i l d growth. These reviews reflect the r e c o g n i t i o n of c h i l d -

development a s an a r e a of major c o n c e r n i n human b i o I c g y .

Uhi1-c). many of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p h y s i c a l g r o w t h are

o b v i a u s , t h e p r o g f e s s of p s y c h o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s sometimes

Bore s u b t l e . It is no less d y n a m i c , h o u e v e r . J u s t as a book .

cannot be j u d g e d b y its cover, t h e p o t e n t i a l o f an i n d i v i d u a l f o r i

p h y s i c a l p e r f o r m a n c e i s d e f i n e d by more t h a n p h y s i c a l *-3

c ~ a r a c t e r i s t i c s a l o n e . T h i s is p a r t i c u l a r l y important when

considering children whose l e a r n i n g a s they g r o w represents a

large contribution t o t h e i r ability t o p o r f o r m motor skills. w

I

The s t u d y of learning h a s o c c u p i e d a p r o m i n e n t p l a c e i n

p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h since the l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y a n d , before

t h a t , in t h e minds of p h i l o s u p h e r s since a n c i e n t times. L e a r n i n g I

theories a n d t h e experiaental a t tempts t o v a l i d a t e o r d i s p r o v e

thea c a n t race t h e i r l i n e a g e t o t h e e a r l y wqitfngs of E b b i n g h a u s Q

(1885), T h o r n d i k e ( 1 8 9 8 ) , a n d Pa 'v lov ( 1 9 2 7 ) ; However. i t was

Hatson ( 1 9 2 0 ) who may be thought o f a s the first a d v o c a t o of t h e

f i r s t aaj&-learnf ng t h e o r y , C o n n e c t i o n i s m . ~ e . a n d those who I

followed h i s l e a d s o c h a s G u t h r i e ( 1 9 5 9 ) . ~ d l l ( 1 943) , a i d ~

S k i h n e r (1953, f 957) , d i d much t o a d v a ~ c e t h e concepts o f how .

human conditioning a n d l e a r n i n g o c c u r s , based o n one of ths major

n n d + r f y i n g premises t h a t these p h e n o a e n a o c c u r a s t h e r e s u l t

of t h e c o n t i g u i t y of stimulus and r e s p o n s e . Indeed, t h e

\ b e h a v i o u r i s t a p p r o a c h still d i c t a t e s today much of how we

perceive learning t o take p l a c e although our thinking on t h e

s u b j e c t has been m o d i f i e d .

C o n n e c t i o n i s m i s not w i t h o u t i t s l i m i t a t i o n s , however. There

a r e many e x a m p l e s of l e a r n i n g w h i c h a r e v e r y d i f f i c u l t i f n o t

i s p o s s i b l e t o ' e x p l a i n w i t h i n a s t r ic t S-R fraaeuork, f o r e x a m p l e ,

l a t e n t o l e a r n i n g . T h e s e l i m i t a t i o n s spawned the second great

schoo l of l e a r n i n g t h e o r y , C o g a i t i v i s m , Led by Tolman (1932 , Z

1949), t r a d i t i o n a l c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g $ h e o r y stressed t h e

importance of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y t o o r g a n i z e aria p r o c e s

s t i m u l i b o f o r e a respocse is e l i c i t e d . arguing t h a t responses d o

n o t a l w a y s s i m p l y fol low s t i m u l i r e f l e x i v e l y .

D e s p i t e t h e concern o f b o t h C o n n e c t i o n i s m and C o g n i t i v i s m

with e x p l a i n i n g b e h a v i o u r , studies of l e a r n i n g l a r g e l y neglected " -

t h 5 d z t a i l s of how t h e motor p a t t e r n s of which the o b s e r v e d

b 3 h a v i o u r was c o m p r i s e d were. learned, This n e g l e c t w q s summar i zed

b e s t b y G u t h r i e who described the r a t s i n Tolauanas maze as being - " b n r i s d i n t h o u g h t 1 * , + o t a l l y u n a b l e to move anywhere i f r e q u i r e d

t o l e a r n only on Toltaan's terms. It is o n l y r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t l y 4

that t h e ways i n which we learn t o perfcrn motor s k i l l s have been

i n v e s t i g a t e d a s t h o r o u g h l y a s the w a y s that v e r b a l s k i l l s and - 1,

w

problew s o l v i n g h a v e been s t u d i e d , To this end, new c o n c e p t u a l

frameworks for d e a l i n g v i t h motor l e a r n i n g and p e r f o r m a n c e have

s v o l v s d ( for example, t h e i n f o r m a t i o n processing a p p r o a c h f t o be

3 i s c u s s e d later). T h e s e new p o i n t s of v i e w are a d m i r a b l y s u i t e d

' t o r e s e a r c h w i t h c h i l d r e n a n d c c u l d p r o v i d e much n e e d e d i n 6 i g 6 t

i n t o growth a n d p h y s 3 c a l p e r f o r m a n c e . 1

-7

i n t o the d e v e l c ~ a e n t a l a s p e c t s of m o t o r s k i l l s h a s not t a k e n 7

advantage o f t h e a v a i l a b l e t s c h n i q u e s , o p t i n g f o r s more

proauc t - o r i e n t e d , o r result o r i o n t e d v i ew r a t h e r than - c-

i n v e 3 t i g a t i n g and u l t i a a t e l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e processes

s u b s e r v i n g t h c s ~ r e s u l t s . w-4

Growth , m a n i f e s t i n g i t s e l f i n t h e s i z e , s h a p e , a n d

proportionality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p e r f o r m e r , i s only one

U: f a c t o r p r o d u c i n g c h a n g e s i n p e r f o r m a n c e , Hany o t h e r

c o n s i d e r a t i o n s such as sense a c u i t y , p e r c e p t i o n , a n d i n t e l l i g . e n c e "-

h a v e been summar ized by Singer ( 7 ) . Some of t h e s e Farameters

h a v e been i n v e s t i g a t e d a s t h e y change w i $ h a g e . For example,

H o d g k i n s (1973) and E c k e r t and E i c h o r n (1977) h a v e shown t h a t

siaple r e a c t i o n time d e c r e a s e s d u r i n g c h i l d g r o w t h kysa@out 50% - b e t w e e n the ages of 6 a n d 19. S i n g e r (1969) h a s r e p o r t e d

d i f f e r e n c a s i n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n r e a c t i o n ' t i m e b e t w e e n t h i r d a n d

sixth g r a d e r s and demo'nstrated t h a t p e r f ccmance cn complex

perceptual motor t a s k s such a s stabilometer b a l a n ' c e a n d rotor

ip' pursuit a l s o i m ~ r o v e s b e t w e e n the third n d s i x t h g r a d e s . '

However, s i m p l e c h a n g e s i n p e r f o r m a n c e say n o t h i n g i about

l e a r n i n g . The i n c r e n e n t s i n motor p e r f o r m a n c e which r e s u l t from m i

g r o w t h a r e , a t least i n p a r t , due t o t h e fact that t h e c r i t e r i a

o f success of such tasks f a v o u r l a r g e r c h i l d r e n . H a t u r a t i o n m u s t

not be c o n f u s e d w i t h l e a r n i n g , a process of r e l a t i v e l y p e r m a n e n t

c h a n g e i n b e h a v i c u r a s t h e r e s u l t of experience o r p r a c t i c e .

A l t h o u g h m a t u r a t i o n a l effects c o n f o u n d o u r a b i l i t y t o i n t e r p r e t

l e a r n i n g e f f ec t s when g r o s s motor t a s k s a r e u s e d , many s t u d i e s o f

this n a t u r e h a v e b e e n dcne . For e x a m p l e , l e a r n i n g of t h r c w i n g

skills a t v a r i o u s ages has f r e q u e n t l y been i n v e s t i g a t e d

( D u s e n b e r r y , ' 1958; Wild, 1938) . - %

Hotor s k i l l s r e s e a r c b w i t h a d u l t s has moved away f rom s i m p l y

c o n c e r n i n g itself w i t h t h e p r o d u c t s of many complex n e a r o m u s c u l a r

o c c u r e n c e s . Running , jumping , a n d t h r o w i n g a r e t h e c u l m i n a t i o n s d

of p r o c e s s e s s w i t h i n t h e performer, no t m o n o l i t h i c e v e n t s .

~ e c o g q i ~ i n g t h i s , r e s e a r c h e r s s u c h as Kay ,(1957) p r o p o s e d t h a t

the performer be t r e a t e d a s a n i n f o r m a t i o n processcr a n d t h i s

a p p r o a c h t o t h e s t u d y of motor p e r f o r a a n c a h a s greatly i n f l u e n c e d

- research since i i n c e ~ t i o n . *' T

T h e v i e w of man a s a n i n f o r m a t i o n p r c c e s s o r r e ~ r e s e n t s a

c o n s i d e r a b l e departure from more w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d Connectionist '. b

i n t e r p r e t a G o n s of b e h a v i o u r . The study cf l e a r n i n g , o r p e r h a p s

sore p r o p e r l y b e h a v i o u r , h a s a l c n g s t a n d i n g t r a d i t i o n o f , ,

w

s $ i ~ u l u s - r e s p o n s e c o n t i g u i t y a p p r o a c h e s . Such i s s u e = a s d r i v e ,

a a t i v a t i o c i and h a b i t s t z s n g t h have been central to our i

A u n d e r s t a n d i n g af the learninq process since the e a r l y p a r t o f t h e

- 2 0 t h c e n t u r y ( H i l l , 196 3) .' However, t h e H u l l i a n a n d S k i n n e r i a n 'a

5

W

0)

V

(d

+,

m

c

a

-c

um

m

Q

, 1

13

m

m

+

.r( .-

0,

YY

Y

H

CU *

A*

*

at 4

f

0i 5

a b

cm

m

-4

Ft

+c

a

0

. U

Q

, to

t-l Q

, e

r(

B*

rd

1

U

Aa

JI

m

.d a

2

*,

a

0

V -4

0

d

*I

C

u

*era

~+

a

U+

'@

3

ld W

' U

) vl

%; . j

u

0

0

Q

+J w

.4

+'

A

du

b'

,

8

.d a

f.

JA

v-

4

03

X

w

(d

ci tc~ .e

-4

V

-rf C3

@S

O

#

04

cr

fQ

)V

)

d

l-l

*d

1 a .2

3 r

l

.G a

a

Q,

(d

ba

el

+'

2 a

c

C@

*

a

4

d 2

a' o

cu u

e

9W

0,

Q

IQ

lm

v-4 U

Q

+r rd

cl Q

, 0

k

V)

.r( a

4

ra

a

a, -4

ar k

fr

U

OO

M

*r &I

01 r

na

a

f I G U R E 1 : AH INFORR'ATIOH PROCESSING RODEL

- Input

' 1 Sensory .

System - . w

Percept ion \

v Memory h

Decision I

\ .I

b

I

Effector Organ (

v -. .

4

Q)

A

u

Q,

(d

b

U

cll .d

M

M

ul s

LO

U@

&

@a

a,

a, -4

w

0

4'

u' Q

, ~

PU

I

G

a

Y

a

cd

*t

o~

rt

dm

a~

c

dy

a

* h

r)

Y)

d -

a

m

.d +,

a

Q)

a

0

9

.c,

a4

m

4

2$

0

Uu

r(

Oa

,o

sa

u

XM

",

Y

Wn

d

~O

+J

U~

+'

Yi

J

+r d

u

(d

@

w L1

YI

QI

29

).

rl

@

Nd

a,

0

0

cll "1

U1

'

~)

~o

ac

l

PI

o

w

v)

o

au

cl

ir

r

rl

s

ar

(+

ra

ow

a+

r

oa

m.

4

%+

J

un

a.

4~

F

Ia

Tl

I$

o

r3

*d

0

wa

+m

%

'u

lo

nr

aw

YI

6

cd

cd

m~

oe

k~

e C

-4

(

d r

Ul

~d

vl

fi

4

UO

e1

O

We

NW

UI

Q,

111

A

.d

cX

u

a

at .

rl

-r

cc

.r

)+

rr

ts

~s

~u

v

e a

(a -4

u

a, i

4

UC

r~

dC

dd

ld

dL

Oi

dO

cl

l

td

* o

tn

~v

la

*

r(

t~

:w

rd

a.

rf

rn

a

a*

+

a~

mw

a~

~c

ll

uc

ea

u

QI

ml

r!

d

cD

+'

O

a

r~

a,

~~

~a

.~

.r

o,

a

c+

,v

,n

to

ed

u

c~

)~

~r

t(

r.

av

r~

e

.r

(~

o~

d

o-

c(

o

a

O~

*X

id

-4

m

I-( O

WC

(U

U~

Wc

(

a

.rl +)

o~

m~

~e

t

x N

CW

O

a c

o

cl 04

+' @

CI

A

LI -4

W

AQ

EC

I

U

0

Q,

~f

ac

~u

u.

ro

ca

v+

vr

~~

~v

)~

~~

m

AI

M+

,

O)

OU

%l

.r

t

M

E

O,

-4

mP

-4

$4 .d

0

%O

WW

c#

+'

dC

ca

.

.r

fU

).

I@

=

SO

@

(n

oL

l

0 C

a

(d

k

+,

vl r

t#

@

a

w

gd

er

am

.u

mm

mm

mn

rl

tn

a

M*

9

w

la

fa Q

) -4

. 2

, 4

cu a

(d

u.

rl.

4

M ~

1.

4 a

to

c

,o

ma

m

a

~,

-c

(a

ow

aa

,

a

0

*G

c,

g,

dQ

,

F]

dc

dz

'a

&a

dW

w

.d

P, a

-r, w

o,. o

cd

~ .

rf

@m

ur

dc

lo

cu

w

a

cc e

le

.u

c3

4

a

.a

4

*+

u h

CI

JO

*

~.

d~

r(

tc

lm

n

f-

40

,

o+

'=

oo

m

+'

4J -

4U

UC

IU

M

a@

dr

lb

,

W

7.4 ,a

. 5

3

A

V~

UM

+,

Q,

OU

WW

w

c.

9

a.

~,

cr

o

u

rl

~(

mg

a

Q,

o

m

J:

@.

,J

Ow

kw

d

-W

A~

d@

sS

U,

U

.to

' Z a

a9

.d

u

ee m

*r

+

'U

Jo

,U

a,

nJ

&i

C

-. 0

U

u

u~

pw

.r

lu

3

rl

(0

0)

Cb

UO

O

*d

W

WO

OU

W *

ur

:m

3 ,

+

a a

$Z

<g

Za

ap

, u

8

@

0

(d

c, C

-m

Cn

+J

Q b

.

(d

(d

.d

mu

#,

a

-14 fi

c7 R

'

n4

.W

u

b3

Qa

aO

(U

O)

a

&r O

4-

'4

-'

-d

#J

a

a+

04

yJ

Uo

4f

44

r

lc

a

U V

) V1

Ih

.d

*4

d

rw

*

d

3.1

/E c

,~

)c

l~

)v

lw

u

K

a

W'

IU

a

's

+'

c,

&

r(

LI M

W.

W

Q,

*r

(r

(*

,

u.

dV

)W

*

O

-*

a

/'

a,

aa

uw

wu

+)

na

a

A

@.

'H

r

d

m

5

4,

u a

Id

rd

O

UR

SO

a

+J

VI

AQ

,

bL

.r

Yc

CQ

Q)

O

).

44

v)

O

H@

U

(rJ

d ,W +J'

** d

0 4

w+

Js

lX

ha

aa

a,

c

w a

an

uc

cl

cP

.E

:

rl

*P

i

u2

,m

a

*r

ac

y

u

-4

1.4 a

w cn

w

.r4 ~c

u

+' +'

A

(d

.

#

+' -Q

4

a

0)

G

y.1

a

30

0

+'

m

a

br

n

~a

a,

-c

r.

,~

m

ad

,

94

U

a

aS

ar

,

+'

8r

(a

~c

r~

l.

r(

~4

0

PI rn

.Ti &

~

)~

ao

v)

cd

ww

~a

la

c

l~

,~

c+

~)

aa

u

0

wa

w.

d

a.

r(

.n

+r

a,

u

.rt k

3

WC

B]

Q,

C.

d

01

@*

d.

d+

,-

C,

r

dc

tr

d

+'

a7

.1

@-

d9

.r

lk

+~

+~

k

UM

U~

UC

ac

t(

d.

Q

3

rl

ct

cl

rd

oo

*~

w

at

oa

r-

t-

wd

aa

u,

k

Q,

*rf W

bO

.

,J

cd

+,

m

wI

lY

(U

0

As

2.

?2

a@

ua

-

ri

kr

(Q

)P

W

UO

UV

)

wc

,a

~v

r~

.r

la

tr

-~

r

la

uu

Y

o

v, r

a,

d

r- 1

abl of t h e a r e a s i n c o n d i d e r a t i o n is t h e c o n c e p t of memory since

all a r e d i r e c t l y or indi'rectly a e a s u r e d as a f u n c t i o n o f

s o m e t h i n g r e a e m b e r e d or f o r g o t t e n e i t h e r i n t h e shor o r l o n g

term. i ,

It is useful -at t h e o u t s e t t o s t a t e t ha t ; as a n a n a t o m i c a l

or physiological entity, meaory h a s nev& b e e n kdedentified 6'

a l t h o u g h much f e s e a r c h i n t h i s area h a s been u n d e r t a k e n . As. the

knowledge of the molecnlar e v e n t s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the f u n c t i o n o f F

the human body i n c r e a s e d , n u s e r o u s t h e o r i e s were advanced i n t h e

attp,n!pt t o explain t h e u a y i n which memory *workedm. Disruptive

t e c h n i q u e s s u c h a s electroconvulsive shock (ECS) p r o v i d e d

e v i d e n c e t h a t there was a n e l e c t r i c a l component of memory (for

e x a m p l e c i o r o v e r a n d S c h i l l e r , 1965) . However, the retrograde

effects of ECS are s h o r t - l i v e d a n d r e s e a r c h ' e a p h a s i s s h i f t e d Z

t o w a r d i d e n t i f y i n g a "memory moleculen which c o u l d sgrve a s a

l o n g term store, a system which better a c c o u n t e d for t h e common

wisdod s u r r o u n d i n g memory, T h i s comaoh wisdom r e g a r d i n g t h e &.

s t a b i l i t y of long term menory (a s t a b i l i t y not c o n s i d e r e d p r e s e n t '

i n t h e e lectr ical p r o p e r t i e s of t h e n e r v o u s system) was givkn

soae credence by the d e m n s t z a t i o n t h a t f n t e ~ - a n i s a l +ransfer of

mesoty v a s possible ( a l t h o u g h the e v i d e n c e ras n o t tharo&#dy . c o n v i n c i n g ) . I n both P l a n a r i a (LlcConnell , 1962) a n d rats (Babich ,

J a c o b s o n , Bubach, and J a c o b s o n , 1965) , some transfer of memory t o

- a r e c i p i a n t animal was shown when h o n o g e n a t e s of b r a i n t i s s u e

8

k

d) +,

0

P

0

rt

a

rt Id

Pi

U

0 e

(I) I

8

u ct) +'

+J k

0

4

m a

w d

4

lu U

m

V

cl d, cl 0

PI I

0

u Q,

V

id M

(d

a

a, m

0

* +J

Q,

Id

8 *1

' tn

0) .a

a a

-4

cd V

S

f .sf

m

a -

E;

m

d

.r( 01

*rl 3 1

u a

Q,

I. V

4- F

l @

dc

d

el It(

C1 U

d

cu 0

(d

MA

a

um

w

w.,

*rt cd

PC

*

w.4 0

a, m

(I) U

U

+I ul 0,

A

Y

d

ar 0, b

c, w a

C, 1

.rl n

0,

w a, U d

d) U

Q

, W

W

.r4 a

C P

(d

4

4J

cn a

1 -4 k

(d a

0

+r

Y(

0

V)

Q,

m

(I) V

w

0 3

4

Q,

4

Y

w

0

u

0

.ri r-, Q

. u

a a

Q,

tn

Q,

A

Y

tn w +,

(d

I4

+'

U)

u 0

IB

0, a

0

m ct Id

4 u

0

*

01

CT a 1

Cc cd b, d

CI 0,

.d

J:

I! Q,

+J

+' -

I4

0

.a

U1

Q, r: *J

ct 4

ii' +' . a! &a V1

Q

3

cl cd

.r4

P

w V

. fl II

r-i id A

u

w b

W

0

L

reason ing which snp)ports the t u o stage theory (5cr e x a m ~ l e , a .

Underwood, 1965; Kofers, 1366) . They have shown t h a t e r r o r s i n

r e c a l l f o l l o w i n g short term f e t a n t i o n intervals are of an

acoustic k i n d , t h a t is, s i ~ i l a r sounding words are confused with 9

each o t h e r . ow ever , f olloving l o n g e r r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s , the

errors i n r e c a l l a r e of a semantic n a t u r e , with words of similar

meaning b e i n g s u b s t i t u t e d for those o r i g i n a l l y l earned . Tbis d

i m p l i e s t h a t a d i f f e r e n c a i n neacry r e p r e s e n t a t i o n cccurs betueen

t h e s h o r t a n d l o n g tar., again supporting t h e d e l i n e a t i o n of t h e

a two s t a g e s . #

O f the t u o hypothes i z i sd s t a g e s , short term memgxy i s t h e

more frequently i n v e s t i g a t e d today, l a r g e l y because -cf

e x p e r i a e n t a l c o n v e n i e n c e , b u t a l s o because inf orna tGn s t o r e d ' i n

long term a e n o r y is h i g h l y resistant t o such phenclena a s

f o r g e t t i n g . The p r o p e r t i e s of l o n g term memory were o f t e n s t u d i e d

during t h e e a r l y pears .of memory research (see Stelrach, 1374) , leaving s h o r t term recall a s fertile research ground i n recant

years, I n addition, the dynamic p r o c e s s s s of nsacry occur during

t h e short term when r a t e r i a l is first being a s s i m i l a t e d and t h e

research s ff ctrt Bas j u s t i f iabf y conesntrate& on i h e s e & y a % e i e -

~ l t h o u g h many o f t h e basic concepts i n v e r b a l l e a r n i n g and

memory have been adap ted t o t h e motor domain, t h e ensuing /

p r o l i f e r a t i o n of d a t a generated h a s been o n l y i n f r e q u e n t l y

collected u s i n g c h i l d s e n a s . subjects. G e n e r a l l y , studies

p e r f o r m e d an c h i l d r e n h a v s s t r e s s e d t h e v i s u q l sy,cteiP. F o r

- example , Baqen (1967) a n d D r u k e r a n d Hagen (1969) examined t h e

d e v e l o p m e n t a l t r e n d s i n p r o c e s s i n g t a s k - r e l e v a n t and

task-irrelevant' i n f o r a a t i c n and c o n c l u d e d t h a t young c h i l d r e n do

not disregard +,he . n n i n f c r m a t i v e inf orata I ion i n a v i s u a l s t i ~ u l u s

a r r ay a s well a s o l d e r c h i l d r e s . I n a d d i t i o n , they f o u n d t h a t

t h e r e is a n a g e dependent i m p r o v e m e n t i n t h e scanning cf a n a r r a y . \

f o r r e l e v a n t , S n l c r n a t i o n . S r o u f e ( 197 1) and ~ r " u ~ s k i a n d Bogle <

(1978) s u g g e s t e d a reason fo r t h i s , s t a t i n g that young c h i l d r e n

m a i n t a i n a less stable state of a t t s n t i o n d u r i n g s h c r t term.

aemorp tasks. ' R a i t h , Harrison, S h i e n g o l d , p n d Hindes ( 1 970) a n d

( H a i t h , 1371) h a v e s h o w n d e v e l o p m e n t s 1 changes i n s h o r t - term

v i s u a l memory. Baring b e e n shown f o u r gecretr ic f i g u r e s for 150

asec, 5 year o l d 6 c o u l d recall only two a f t e r a brief retention

per iod v b e r e a s a d u l t s c o u l d r e g u l a r l y recall a l l four w

successfully. The a u t h o r s s u g g e s t e d t h a t clder children and

a d u l t s employ a rehearsable v e r b a l code d u r i n g such memory t a s k s 4

while y cungor children e n p l o f a n o n - r e h e a r s a b l e visual code.

,' S i n i l a r l y , Conrad f 1571) and F lavell, F r e i d r i c k s , and Hopt (1370)

proposed t h a t rehearsal s t r a t e g i e s c h a n g e with a g e . .

w 0

Y

V) 94

cn

w*

Id

Z a

fl

wr

o

w0

3 a

n

81 m

m

U

lc

fV

)

.d Ia

cn n

al

(d

NO

-

* W

cu

MU

-

0

a- a,

OY

,=

Q1 Q

a

ld

al

tn

U

3

u

0

.r) w

ay

*

Of

nd

k

I

v]

Ed a s

.rl I4

a

a.

W

W

Vi

um

M

-4

cd

a) a

(I, +' (I, 4

*r

a

- d

. M

Q,

* (I, a

0

tl

T h e c o n c e r n w i t h the p r o c e s s i n g of v i s u a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s n o t

unfounded. V i s i o n p l a y s a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n the d e v e l o p m e n t of

s k i l q b g c h i l d r e n . Reiber~ (1968) had 5, 7, a n d 9 year o l d s

p e r f or^ a p i n b a l l p r o p e l l i n g t a s k a n d r e p o r t e d d i f f e r e n c e s

be tween abe g r o u p s i n the a b i l i t y t o perform t h e t a s k o n l y when

v i s u a l i n p u t was n o t a v a i l a b l e . S m o t h e r g i l l (1373) showed no age 'i, t,

differences i n the a b i l i t y t o l o c a l i z e t a r g e t s v i s u a l l y . However,

i f t h e t a r g e t u a s p r e s e n t e d , t h e n ramoved, 3-10 y e a r o l d s were

better t h a n 6-7 year o l d s i n delayed r e c a l l o f the target

p o s i t i o n . ; I n a d d i t i o n , v i s d a l p r e s e n t a t i o n s were remembered by -

, b o t h groups better t h a n p r o p r l o c e p t i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n s . T h e

importance, of v i s u a l i ~ f o r r n a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g i s n o t t o b e

R e c e n t l y , some r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e c o n c e n t r a t e d , not o n a n y

p a r t i c u l a r sensory mode ( t h o u g h c e r t a i n l y cne o r more s e n s o r y

modes a re i n v o l v e d i n a n y p e r f o r m a n c e t e s t ) , but rather on I i

g e n e r a l aspects of short term memory e x p e r i m e n t s u s i n g c h i l d r e n r

as subjects. F o r e x a m p l e , of i n t e r e s t i n terms of s a m p l i n g

+ s n b j e c ts, t h e c o r r e l a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n i n t e l l i g e n c e a n d

s h o r t term memory h a s b e e n e x a a i n e d b y Cohen a n d Sandberg ( 1 977) . T h e y p & s e n t e d e v i d e n c e t h a t i n t e l l i g e n c e i s a good predictor of

s h o r t term aemory p e r f o r m a n c e i n reca l l f o r mos t recent itemsSAbut d

n o t i n r e c a l l f s r f i rs t o r l o n g term items, T h e d a t a suggest t h a t

i n t e l l i g e n c e may b e r e l a t e d , t h o u g h not n e c e s s a r i l y c a u s a l l y , t o

. tn Pi .Q

(U

-

a

d, m

la

.ri

u C

I Q

a,

u +J

-4

111 $4

+' U

d

.I D

U

u1 a,

s, .a

k

t' 0

u -4

a

O'

U)

w

v)

Y

Q

a

9

a, Q

k

u

w

tr w

w

4

u .a

*,

a

a

@a

d

UJ r-l

0,

w

U

-4

' M

aU

as

&a

a

ma

c~

-r

vl

u

ak

a-

4

ld

+,

B,

+'

Pa

-F

1.4

Pu

vd

n

Q)

0

CI .4

m

fi

a

m

cc( M

2 8

oe

as

ir

r

a

-4

0)

u

a

U) wora

* v,

u

p, e

ac

rf

fh

fa

F

t*

W

fi &

'- ~

*a

ao

o,

c:

O,

Q,

Ud

W*

I

~+

JT

IN

.Q

e

u

rl

ry

ew

L

IO

*V

/L

)r

4W

O

kr

(b

a,

.r

(c

a

WU

Jd

Cl

d

k

fd a

C

V)

au

.r

(e

ma

o,

a

&+

a,

or .rl

C1 U

@.

er

*

@@

Ad

u

-d

'

UU

~P

+

rl

0

C

P

" S

19

1(

dC

,r

n.

d

A

rU

rd

fn

~P

c'

nd

a

&J

aw

'

d

0

0,

Lt

cU

rt

I

wr

(d

(d

C1

m

L1 I4

I

dd

A

Q)

Q1

+'

Od

C1 w

ta

a b

e

a, C

D*

r(

d P

c, +'

U)

'

(d

kl

rd

cd

a

P

V1 O

ES

r

3' a

4

rn w

db

W

aa

wt

n

C,

aw

da

rc

rc

o

av

o-

rl

AV

Q)

(d

'R9

* 0

. 6x4

MU

-d

VP

1

P,

*,

'd

F1

a*

,m

~

rn

cu

.r

(a

v,

a

-4

'G

PI

4

c, .d

TI

F( o

rcl

ma

+,

t o be l e a r n e d . I n a d d i t i o n , o l d a r subjects, u n l i k e younge,r ones,

c o u l d s i r a u l t a n e o u s l y e n c o d e temporal a n d t a m p o r a l a n d s p a t i a l

i n f o r m a t i o n , ' However , s u b j e c t s of 5 a n d 6 years 018 could be 'P

c o n f u s e d i n t h e i r r e c a l l of s p a t i a l l o c a t i o n by t h e n a t u r e of the

= &zi~el o b ~ e ~ " e d b e t r e d n t w o o b j e c t s , p e r h a p s d u e to t h e i n a b i l i t y E

-\ . - t o reject t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n .

T u r n i n g t o a more p r o c e s s o r i e n t e d v i ~ w of s h o r t t e r m

meaory, Enmer i ch a n d Bckerman (1978) t e s t e d f i rs t a n d f i f t h a -

" 8

graders on a 30 item set of p i c t u r e s p r e s e n t e d e i t h e r random1 J f c \

, i n b l o c k e d c a t e g c r i e s , o r i n c a t e q o r i e s s o r t e d by t h e s u b j e c t . i #

Recall was e i t h e r free, c u e d , o r c o n s t r a i n e d . The results showed

t h a t c h i l d r e n * s r e c a l l , u n l i k e adults, was i n f l u e n c e d b y - .J

r e t r i e v a l c o n d i t i o n s - a n d n o t b y e n c o d i n g , I n t e r e s t i n g l y ,

L o n g s l e t h a n d Z o l t a n (1978) , i n a test-retsst of grades 1 a n d 2 ,

showed t h a t a g e 0ffects were two times a s great cn o r i g i n a l \

l e a r n i n g t b a n o n r e t e n t i o n itself, i m p l y i n g t h a t t h e c r i g i n a l %*'

\

. * c o d i n g p r o c e s s e s a re p e r h a p s more i o p o r t a n t t h a n i n d i c a t e d b y

Emmerich a n d Ackerman.

R e g a r d i n g t h e v a r i o u s s e n s o r y modes i n r e l a t i c n t o each

- o t h e r , F i s h b e i n , Decker, and Y_i&cox (1977) in a s t u d y cf c h i l d r e n 6

i n grades 1, 2, and 4 r e p o r t e d t h a t o l d e r c h i l d r e n were beiter a t ,-+ '-.x,

r e c o g n i z i n g cJecme<ric f o r m s t h a n y o u n g e r ones b u t t h a t t h e r e was , - i

no difference between i n t r a m o d a l a n d c r o s s - m o d a l recal l . - .

C l e a r l y , c h i l d r e n a r e c a p a b l e f s u c c e s s f u l l p . u s i n g many -"S d i f f e r e n t s w s o r y modes d w r i n g short term memory tasks t h o u g h ,

f o r t h e mos t pa r t , $he l i t e r a t u r e h a s c o n c e n t r a t e d on t h e v i s u a l

s y s t e m

I n motor s k i l l s t h e p r o p r k o c e p t i v e m e c h a n i s m s a r e o f p r i m e

. c o n c e r n . As R a r i c k ( 1978) stated: "Very l i t t l e r e s e a r c h of

c o n s e q u e n c e h a s tean. d o n e . . . . i n the a g e r a n g e 5 t o 15 y e a r s n .

Perha'ps t h e larges t d a f i c i e n c y i n motor d e v e l o p m e n t i s i n the

a r e a of the properties o f t h e m o t o r s y s t e m i t s e l f . It is i n t h i s

. direc t icn t h a t r e s 2 a r c h f o c u s . is r e q u i r e d .

I t is u s e f u l when d e a l i n g w i t h a n e v e n t s u c h a s m o t o r I

, p e r f o r m a n c e t o c o n s t r u c t a model u h i c h d e s c r i b e s c o n c e p t u a l l y t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p s be twoen the h y p o t h e s i z e d c o m p o n e n t s of t h e

p e r f o r m a n c e system. . A m o d i f i c a t i o n , and e l a b o r a t i o n of a model

f rom Corlet t , C a l v e s t , a n d Banister (1978) is shown i n P i g u r e 2.

P r e v i o u s s t u d ' i e s u s i n g s u c h ~ o d e l i (e.g. Ccr le t t , 1977) have

c o n c e n t r a t e d on t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s between p h y s i c a l

t r a i n i n g and peif o r m a n c e c f s u c h p r e d o m i n a n t l y aerobic t a s k a s

r u n n i n g a n d c y c l i n g . I n t b s c u r r e n t s t u d y , the c e l a t i o n s h i p s

between t h e s - k i l f n l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e p e r f o r m e r and

p e r f o r m a n c e -of a m o t o r t a s k a r e e x a m i n e d . \

F I G U R E 2: A HODEL OF A U H A N PERP0RflANC.E

Training

Aerobic

C

Strength ,

v

Per forrnance

'.*-t Ski l l ,- _I Psychological

Factors

T o i s o l a t e t h e s k i H p l a s p e c t s of p e r f b r m a n c e a s c o m p l e t e i y

a s possible, it i s * n e c e s s a r y t o e l i m i n a t e o r m i n i m i z e t h e

contribution of o the r f a c t o r s , s p e c i f i c a l l y t h e p h y s i c a l t r a i t s

' a n d l e v e l of #@physical f i t n e s s n ' of the p e r f o r m e r . O t h e r

c o n s i d e r a t i o n ' s such a s the p s y c h o l o g i c a 1 s t a t e of t h e performer

(em g. l e v e l of ~ o t i v a t f on) a n d s t a b i l i t y of t a s k characteristics \ ,

between s u b j e c t s must be t a k e n i n t o account a s well. Ths

e x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n s and a p p a r a t u s d e t a i l e d h e r e are

m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of + t h e need to deal a s m2ch a s p o s s i b l e v i t h s k i l l

r a t h e r t h a n other c o n f o u n d i n g fac*ors such a s speed, s t r e n g t h , '

a n d a e r o b i c c a p a c i t y . These d e s i g n s a r e c o n c e r n e d vith t h o s e

a s p e c t s of motor d e v e l o p m e n t r e s e a r c h deemed a o s t i m p o r t a n t by

R a r i c k . S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e y a r e d e s i g n e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e ways

i n which c h i l d r e n use p r o p r i o c e p t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n .

The l i t e r a t u r e reveals a number of f e a t u r e s c o n c e r n i n g the I

inf o r n a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g ' a b i l i t y bf c h i l d r e n a s they matu re . lost

of t h e r a s e a r c h h a s s t u d i e d t h e v i s u a l s y s t e n : however , these -\

f i n d i n g s combined with what i s known of t h e motor s y s t e m allow

t h e f o r n a t i o n of s e v e r a l h y p o t h e s e s r e g a r d i n g t h e d e v e l o p a a n t a l

a s p e c t s o r motor short term memory. T h e major h y p o t h e s i s ardund - which a l l of t h e experiments i n t h i s s t u d y r e v o l v e is t h a t a s

c h i l d r e n grow older , their a b i l i t y t o p r o c e s s p r o p r i o c e p t i v a

i n f o r m a t i o n i n c r e a s e s . Working i n t h e realm of s h o r t term memory, -

this gives rise t o several specific hypotheses which form. t h e

basis of t h e e x p e r i a e n t s d e s c r i b e d later i n the t e x t . In

addition, i m p o r t a n t hypotheses t e s t e d u s i n g a d u l t s 'as subjects

have h o t been tested using children. Therefore, within each age

group, several h y p o t h e s e s arise i n d e p e n d e n t of m a t u r a t i o n

effects. These w i l l b e described where appropriate Jn the f o l l o w i n g ,

chapters.

CHAPTER 2

~ i p e r i m e n t 1

A. I n t r o d u c t i o n

i. Movement L e n g t h

Laabs (1973) p r e s a d t s d e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e c e n t r a l t e n d e n c y i\ , effect d e s c r i b e d by l e o b a (1909) was a p p a r e n t i n arm p o s i t i o n i n A t a s k s commonly used i n mo to r skills research. The ~ r i n c i p l e

st-atas t h a t short moveBents t e n d t o be o v e r s h o t while l c n q 1

m v e a e n t s t e n d t o b e u n d e r s h o t . Laabss s u b j e c t s moved a l e v e r 0

over a n arc o f 120 with movement e n d p o i n t s f a l l i n g i n cne of

three sectors (40-60°, 6 1-80'. a n d 8 1- i20°) . Hcwements were a l s o

g r o u p e d on t h e basis of their e x t e n t , s h o r t ones being 10, 15,

a n d 20 cm, l o n g ones being 25, 30, a n d 35 cm. O n the b a s i s o f

a l g e b r a i c (signed) error c o m p a r i s o n s , s h o r t movements were 1 /i

r e p r o d u c e d o v e r l y - l o n g , ( t h a t is, a p o s i t i v e a l g e b r a i c error) 1 1

while l o n g movements ae re r e p r o d u c e d o v e r l y - s h o r t ( a n e g a t i v e

a l g e b r a i c errcr) , following a 12 second r e t e n t i ~ n i n t e r v a l .

S e v e r a l studies p r e c e d e d t h a t of Laabs and p r o v i d e d

essentially the samo i n f o r m a t i o n . Lloyd a n d C a l d w e l l (1 956) and

a a r t e n i u k , s h i e l d s , a n d Campbell ( 1972) g a v e s u p p o r t i n g e v i d e n c e

of the central tendency e f f e c t on t h e b a s i s o f a l g e t r a i c , o r 1 '

c o n s t a n t , error. Nevertheless, t h e l a t t e r s tudy shcwed no

d i f f e r e n c e s in ' v a r i a b l e e r r o r and s'uggested a c c o r d i n g l g tlhat >

l imb p o s i t i o n receptcrs a r e q u a l i t a t i v e and p rov ide e q u a l l y

a c c u r a t e l o c a t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n independent of the extent of t h e * ' *

movement. One study stands i n c o n t r a s t t o those j u s t

a e n t i o n e d . ~ t e l m a c h 'and ai3so'n ( 1 970) r e p o ~ t e d no s i g n i f i c a h t >

effect on mean c o n s t a n t e r r o r ' for r o t a t i o n a l arm p o s i t i o a i n q

between 25' and 125'.

Stelmach, Kelso, and dccullagh (1 976) had sub jecTs perform 8

I

* b dfl h o r i z o n t a l ar . p o s i t i o n i n g t a s k i n which t h e - moiasents 0 t e rmina ted i n - one of four. s e c t o r s of a 160 a r c , Although t h e *

aa in effect o f ' sectors was found t o be s i g n i f i c a n t for a l l a

depenzent e r r c r measures used ( a l g e t r a i c error, mean squared

e r r o r , and u i t h i n - s u b j & c t e r r o r ) , examinat icn of means b y both ' .

s i m p l e o b s e r p a t i o n and pos t hoc s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s provides an *

u n c l e a r p i c t u r e a s to t h e n a t u r e of t h e s e c t o r eff,ect. t

Hetl iodclogical d i f f e r e n c e s ( f o r example, dinear movements

vs. r o t a t i o n a l - eovements) and different emphases placed on

r e p o r t e d d e p e n d e n t ? e r r o r measures makes it d i f f i c u l t t o b e

c e r t a i n what t h e bffect of movement extant is on t h e accuracy of

r ep roduc t idn cf c r i t e r i o n soveaents. U i t h c h i l d r e n , development

of movement s k i l l s a p p e a r s t o proceed i n a p r o x i a a l - d i s t a l

f a s h i o n , that is, a o r e m e n t s close t o t h e body c e n t r e b ' j l i n e a re

l e a r n e d before n v m e n t s a ay from t h e ceptre l i n e ( C r a t t y, 1967) . t \ \ E x t r a p o l a t i n g fro. this, & n i g h t s p e c n l a t e t h a t l c n g e r

,

moweaents p l a c i n g t h e e n d ~ o i n t f a r t h e r from t h e c e n t r g line would

be more subject t o error upon r a p r o d u c t i o n t h a n s h c r t e r o n e s f o r

which t h s e n d p o i n t i s mors T h e r e is l i t t l e e v i d e n c e f o r

t h i s ir; t h e literature, however, b n l y Stelmach (1970) h a s I .

r e p o r t e d t h a t r o t a t i o n a l p o s i t i o n i n g errors a re l e s s n e a r e s t t h e

v e r t i c a l a n d i n c r e a s e a s t h e movement e n d p o i n t moves of f - c e n t r e .

ii. R e t e n t i o n I n t e rva l .

I n 1359, P e t e r s o n and P e t e r s o n (see also Brown, 1358)

r e p o r t e d t h e r e s u l t i s of what h a s become t h e f u n d a a e n t a l short

t e r a memory e x p e r i m e n t uFon which much s u b s e q u e n t research h a s I)

been based. T h e y p r e s e n t e d t h e i r s u b j e c t s with a l ist of

n o n s e n s e s y l l a b l e s , then t e s t e d t h e i r r e c a l l - a t v a r i o u s r e t e n t i o n

i n t e r ~ a l s f o l l c w i e g p r e s e n t a t i o n . T h e y t h a t , r i t h

i n c r e a s i n g length of the r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l (from 0 t o 18

s e c o n d s ) s u b j e c t s re capable of r e c a l l i n g f e v e r of t h e list La c o ~ p o n e n t s . They argued tbat t h i s c o n s t i t u t e d +wi&nce l o sopport

of t r a c e decay i n the s h o r t tera,

. . T h e Peterson a n d Peterson e x p e r i m e n t a l p a r a d i g m was a d a p t e d

t o motor short term memory in 1966 by Adams and ~ i j k s t r a uho Ir

stressed t h a t Bcre power would be added t o empirical l a w s

o b t a i n e d f rom ve rba l l e a r n i n g experieents i f t h e y could be shown

tc hold for other responses c l a s s e s . T h e i r subjects moved a -

freely s l i d i n g e l e a e n t along a .eta1 bar to a s top $ 6 6 , 4Bree. or

five times, t h e n waited for up to threa m i n u t s s before a t t e m p t i n g

t o r e c a l l t h e r o v e ~ e n t . T h e results which showed a h = o l u t e e r r o r

i n c r e a s i n g a s the r e t e n t i o n interval lengthened, s u p p c r t e d t h e

t r a c e . h y p o t h e s i s (Brcvn, 1358) , t h a t is, the o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g

t r i a l ( s ) l eave a "aemory tracew which decays with tire as did t h e

v e r b a l material cf Peterscn and P e t s r s o n , I n a d d i t i o n , Adams a n d

Di j k s t r a illusirate&-a reduction i n a b s o l u t e e r r o r fo r a given

r e t e n t i o n interval wben'+ore n r e i n f orcing t r i a f s u (an a l l n s i o n to / a -

a * t h e S - R a n a l o g y seen by &$ams) were given, .

L

One i m p o r t a n t p r o c e d u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n muit be addressed to

properly appreciate d a t a c o l l e c t e d during n o t a r s h o r t tera aenory

e x p e r i ~ e n t s u s i n g l i m b pcsitioning tasks, Laabs (1373) , although

' c e r t a i n l y nut the f i r s t to do so (see Lenba, 1 9 0 9 ) , presented

evidence suggesting that a number of d i f f e r e n t p o t e n t i a l movement

cnes Here a v a i l a b l e t o subjects d u r i n g l i n e a r arm p ~ e t i o n i n g --? ...

e x p e r i m e n t s . H i s d a t a shoved t h a t d i s t a n c e and l o c a t i o n cnes

were d i f f e r e n t i a l l y e a f f e c t e d b y f i i l e d a n d u n f i l l e d r e t e n t i o n

i n t e r v a l s . D i s t a n c e c u e e r r o r s , i n c r e a s e d d u r i n g i n c r e a s i n g

- retention i n t e r v a l l e n g t h f a tracs d e c a y ) but uere ' c n a f f e c t e d by

i n t e r p o l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s , ' ~ n the other h a n d , l o c a t i o n c u e errors

uere c o r p a r a t i v f l y r e s i s t a n t t o unfilled r e t e n t i c n intervals but

increased f o l l o w i n g i e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s f i l l e d with interfering

activities. Since L a a b s 8 s t u d y , e q u i v o c a l e v i d e n c e h a s been

presented w b i c h leaves the n a t u r e of d i s t a n c e a n d l c c a t i a n c u e s

a n y t h i n g b u t c lear .

. C o n s i s t e n t f i n d i n g s indicate t h a t l o c a t i o n ( t h a t is , * + .

esovement endpoint) c u e s a r e c a p a b l e of being r e h e a r s e d when t h e

o p p o r t u n i t y i s a v a i l a b l e . Bmonq t h e s t u d i e s c o r r o b o r a t i n g t h e ,"

f i n d i n g s of L a a h s (1 9 7 3 1 ~ regarding t h e - n a t u r e < of location c u e s

3re !iarto,niuk ( 1973) , Diewert ( 1 9 7 5 ) . a n d S t e l m a c h , Uallace, a n d

R c C r a c k e n ( 1 3 7 6 ) . T h a t t h k r e i s a rehearsable c o d e subserving

l o c a t i o n is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h w h a t is kncwn o f proprioceptive

aechan i sas (fcr exaapl~, see Kelso a n d Stelmach, 1 9 7 6 ) .

on for tun at el^, t h e findings for distance Cues a r e h i g h l y

ambi q n o u s a n d l e a v e t h e Laabst d e l i n e a t i o n o f d i s t a n c e a n d

location i n some d o n b t . f o r e e l e , w h i l e P o s n e r (1967) and

Roxf e y (137tt f f cund no . a b f f i t y uf subjects to rehearse and r e t a i n Y

aistance informatiua in short 'term r e m x y , Mrteaiak f 1973) a n d

D i e v e r t ( 1 9 7 5 ) fcund t h e c p p o s i t e t o be t h e case.

PC

*,

v)

Q,

tn

M

a! a

o)

OW

a

s

w

u)

'u

aJ r

t2

im

P

tF Q

+

r-

ea

rd

cd

c1

Z1

-l

o

e

a' V1

0

+r u

tz, G

Q

I $4

k

0

F,

v)

a,

@Q

( c

.r(

tt

4

o +

,+

r~

,~

,+

ra

r

( a

.w

.d

#W

v)

Va

JO

W

uo

w

a

V)

a

U4

.O

0

0

at

uv

l-

dv

la

u

r(

a)

A

u

u

Sc

ua

o

u

a

6.1 o

) a

mc

~a

wr

zr

*

-l

o

a

w u

*m

CI\

a

a

+I

u

a

o

U

c, 0

"

4m

a

CW

ME

0

4'

UI fi

m

Ur

WL

1V

)U

UO

4'

u

Wa

,.

UO

.d

.

ad

*rl

W

&4

13

lu

.d

W

rd

w

-4

ou

ww

+

a

m o

o+

a

UY

.

B

Q,

H

9J

W

V

P

U)

5

a

o a

Q,

W

W?

.~

(V

IQ

.U

~A

U

*d

V

Q1 C

aQ

ld

*J

Q

~~

aa

ow

oo

au

u

.. w

cu

am

av

m

A

r) .rl

c)

o

U-

rl n

.ti u

u .

rl

cd

om

aa

+r

+

ag

o

a

+,

a c

,G

a

IJ

+,

UA

~(

W~

U

rd Q

@

aa

-r

r(

s.

d@

Y

UO

w

uc

d.

r(

*

ca

p1

uo

a

(O

10 .a

c

), *

'W

tz

a

u.

m o

I a

a

VW

h

am

0

Id

.rl

Q,

m

OC

c*

tl

e

&a

-c

,

G

+,

%:

,n

cn

a,

o,

S

k8

aa

m

o, P

3

e~

sq

a

n

or(

a) *

,o

vo

.w

oc

tm

o)

ow

a,

*ti

o

aw

cu

tu

+L

a)

r(

rn

ut

'+

c,

a

6,

C+

,+

~.

~.

=I

UU

HM

U

at

,n

+~

ow

ao

a

-u

u

+,

ao

--

r

c3

rd

wn

0)

W

d-

PK

I

d@

U

rd d

O

) Q

Q

,'

-

rd .rl

0,

P.(

+8

30

@@

n4

'@

aM

@

. B

u

wa

aw

"

8w

(

dU

u)

OP

>S

u)

C

0

C'

0, 2

.m

a, id

tm

0

4

+J

3

+r

tu

wm

9

arc-r

wP

~.

cI

.~

LS

C~

O

4

W

.a a

-m

m

\

(U

. E1 Q

id

+J

Tl

+J

a)

+r

ol

*

dU

v(

v1

0

FJ

0,

Q)

Cl

a

6, 1.N

o

.r

lo

aw

~

1.

d-

do

rd

~1

.

rl

aa

,

c,

du

a

us

c,

Q

) c

3r w

a)

+I

.rl .4

4

4

~~

cr

ct

cl

)~

+r

ur

l

bV

s0

1

r(

CI

Li

3E

-c

Gl

m

~@

d-

ti

d~

*d

@(

dr

l

aa

na

s

o

a-

r)

as

i

P

A+

,.^

5

X*

1a

O)

.d

o

:-. -4

Q,

.d

t,

h-

9

u

J

cd .c

l o

+r

vl

u~

aa

c,

0

)3

w

a1 +r

w a

o

A

.o a)

u

id

UI a,

(d

C

V)

w .d

.

rf .rl

n

41

.r(

a

u

co V

) U-

A

w 4

.0

m

.4

a

a

r

.cl +!

- Y

u

c

ds

e~

a

.r

(a

+~

mp

, u

r(

.r

l~

a

~a

m~

oa

,

u) .rl

r9 U

J m

ar

d

0

c7 m

.a o

o

o

ur

r-

pr

(d

Ur

4C

4J

r

Q,

u,

pr

(-

(f

tm

a

+J w

.r(

c.d a

m

-4

F

~Q

)Q

UI

~)

U

-w

aC

aw

Aa

th

a,

P

u

.r

l*

nl

aI

Cr

.,

+a

a,

0

*H

Uc

i+

'V

QQ

.r

f

a

I. Cr

UW

*

.d om

bi

cu w

-4

ea

m *

cr

l~

,a

rl

~+

~r

l~

0

R4

J

V)

CC

~

UO

Bd

4

W

r(

du

)U

C

IS

~1

*.I-

I

I.

W

Ud

O

o.

;j

av

+r

a,

r-

l~

,~

UI

0

.rl L-l

a, 4'

A -4

E(

a, .ri

W

0

U

*d

t-4 *

d

a

a

ul -4

c

d+

v)

ow

+,

c

lu

,a

aa

ma

=f

rd

uI

U)

W~

Ld

(d

V1

ud

Z

Zu

~

-4

mU

rl

M

rJ

0t

nJ

.A

*

rl

fa

+'

CI

w

u .

::

W

.r

(q

)U

1O

,U

V1

(d

OC

,

C4

Q\

Wr

b

RO

AW

d

QU

+J

4

'4

~

M

~6

vl

+r

ru

ot

nu

rl

w -

ow

rr

o

u

n

-r

)u

ll

no

-

MO

OW

OU

1O

Ut

-4

WU

3

-4

fl U

Od

d+

JU

d*

r

0)

W

5

QI

.ri d

U a

(d

a) O

+,

-d

*

a 0

ao

a\

Q,

3

+J a

m@

r(

r(

~d

Oa

-d

W-

.

d~

ca

aa

,

01 O

) cc

+,

ao

)a

n~

UQ

IQ

~Y

w

+r o

a

cu

'd

t

ra

vc

yp

,v

ll

nc

uc

a(

da

o

ur

l

cd

yl

rl

rd

~d

va

c

aw

cu

aa

c,

a+

~ -d

Q

) d

Et

0

CU

+~

~A

(

d'

rl

::

I:

"

U

a

+v

a~

,c

yr

(a

aa

~(

ea

C

IH

P~

O)

~~

r

d3

ed

l.

43

(d

O

Ir

l

Q)

'@

+

,U

l.

lO

M+

'O

r

i

1-4 -4

~+

,V

)W

@W

HM

~~

UP

W

h@

Wr

dW

dr

(~

V

W.

ri

Jl

rl

WO

O,

R,

Od

O

-d

AM

dO

Ad

AC

JQ

P

WD

~B

~M

W~

~U

Q~

a

@-

.P

I

~1 #

..

A

v

w

U

cd

0

U,

C

m u

C

4

+J cf

crr m

cl a

u,

81 a

a

ul a

4.' crr

(d

#

P,

VI V

4

V)

a

td -4 C

4

Id b 3

r=- a!

*

A

r

4'

-

T o bolster the i n a d e q u a c i e s of t h e i n d i v i d u a l m e a s u r e s ,

s e v e r a l c o m p o s i t e measures h a v e been p r o p o s 3 d . For e x a m p l e , A

Henry (1974) s u g g e s t e d t h e u s e of a single e r r o r measure s imilar

t o t h a t previously m e n t i o n e d . This error tsrm i s o f the form:

In addition, R Q ~ (1976) s u g q e s t e d t h a t a l l errcr m e a s u r e s

(E, a b s o l u t e error, c o n s t a n t error, and v a r i a b l e e r ro r ) b e

a n a l y z e d i n a m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e ,

T h e f i n a l word on t h i s fundaol len ta l problem h a s n o t been

- w r i t t e n , A t the present time, s i n c e no l i t e r a t u r e i n motor s h o r t /

term memory of c h i l d r e n i s avai lab le , i t seems a d v i s a b l e t o

report a l l o f a b s o l u t e , c o n s t a n t , a n d v a r i a b l e errors, b e a r i n g i n

mind t h e i r inherent d e f i c i e n c i e s . I n t h i s way, da ta c o l l e c t e d I

using c h i l d r s n a s subjects will, i n t h e i n i t i a l stages, b e

a v a i l a b l e f c r comparison w i t h p r e v i o u s l y - r e p o r t e d a d u l t d a t a

v h i c h is expressed i n terns of all t h r e e d e p e n d e n t measures. i 1

a

'u

n

u

0

Q 0

OW

VI

La +,

4

a

4

0

a, m

om

'

wo

o

BM

ca

Y

QU

O

wo

mu

L

) a

Q,

e

kd

O&

W

OM

U

+.

QU

A

1

m

a

o, +

#e

rn

R

u

Q,

,rl LI

Z"

K4

4

*+

b)

k

ma

a

Q,

0

4.' a

#

to

w

a)

am

o

Id 3

rcl u

h

dM

WU

to

a*

r.

d

mc

+

u a

,$

E

C I

F+

U$

6

m

vl

C1 u

V

.d Q

1 a

d

(d

w 0,

Q,

d

. a

+,

Y '0

Q

+J 4

tr 4-1

C

t'

iX

r0

.d

(d

d,

s

ao

*o

*cl

d

U1

dO

d

.+

J?

Q+

r~

L)

3

w

Ol

Pl

Ia

'n

o

V1

AO

,.

dd

d

fu

rn

ld

m

ru

m.

r(

10

-ri m

U

@

Cl

w

&@

W

VQ

JO

80

,

0,

Ye

!

8

1

Ac

lW

+,

0

Q,

w,

4-

0

id a

u

nd

a,

+'3a

m

0

a*

@

4) d

m2

C1

u

w *A

0

'

4 a

'Q

, a

cd o

r4

mw

m

(0

. ri

Ur

n*

U

C

*

+,

-4

V1 (d

OJ

A

mm

4J

a

td U

WQ

tho study. P r i o r a p p r o v a l ' w a s o b t a i n e d from t h e D o p a r t ~ e n t of

K i n e s i a l o g y ~ r a d n a t e S t u d i e s Committee, ..

Thirty chilaren i n e a c h of throe age groups yare tested. Thz

Bean ages of t h e t h r e e groups were 5.8 years,',8.9 years, and 12.5 *

years. Fifteen e a c h of b o y s a n d g i r l s a t i e a c h a g e were t 8 s t e d . b

S i x c h i l d t e n were l e f t handed: for t h e s e s o b j e c t s , te;t p r o t o c o l s * u e r e m a i ~ i t a i n e d a s for ,right handed o n e s except t h a t movemsnts

w e r e performed w i t h t h e l e f t h a n d in-the o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n t o

t h o s e a'ade by ri& h a n d e d s u b j e c t s . T h r e e - h f t h a n d a r s were

k i n d e r g a r t e n s , two were g r a d e 3*s, and o n e was a grade 6.. , .

a

--a

These age d i v i s i c n s correspdnded t o - g r a d e s ~ i n d e r ~ a r t e n , 3,

and a combined c l a s s of grades 6 and- 7 . The d a S i g n of t h e s t u d y - was c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l i n n a t u r e , meaning t h a t c h i l d r e n were t ~ s t d d

o n l y once with t h e means f o r e a c h of the a q e groups serving a s a

prototype for c h i l d r e n o f t h a t age . A l o n g i t u d i n a l o r mixed

l a n g i t n d i n a l d e s i g n was n o t f e a s i b l e for t h i s s t u d y d.ue t o t h e

time c o n s t r a i n t s imposed b y s u c h studies,

?A- 1

No a t t e m p t t o categorize subjects o n the b a s i s of p h y s i c a l

o r ps y c h o l a g i c a l maturity was deemed plausible a l t h o u g h s u c h

t e c h n i q u e s are a v a i l a b l e , For e x a ~ p l e , p h y s i o l o g i c a l age can be

deterained p i a s k e l e t a l age and p s y c h o l o g i c a l a g e can b e

determined in numerous ways s u c h a s t h e fl-space c o n c e p t s &

p r e s e n t e d i n t h e n e o - P i a g e t i a n f r amework by Gerson a n d Thomas

F I G U R E SLIDE BAB APPARATUS

ware asked * t o rzproduce p rev ious ly l e a r n e d movements w i t h both

d i s t a n c e and l o c a t i o n c u e s a v a i l a b l a , or l o c a t i o n c u e s a lone , 4

a v a i l a b l a . S u h j e c t s performed the t a s k s w i t h eyes t i g h t l y s h u t

t o e l i m i n a t e v i s u a l * i n p u t and subjac ts were al lowed t o v i s u a l l y

' acquaint themselves with t h e appara tus before exper imen ta t ion

began.

iv. Design and Analysis

Experiment # I prov ides d a t a f o r ths performance of a l i n e a r

'l arm ' p o s i t i o n i n g task f o r children i n each of t h e age groups.

Each s u b j e c t perform2d 18 c r i t e r i o n movements whose o r d e r was

randomly ass igned . T h e 1 0 movements were ccmprTsed ?f

ccmbina t ions of t h e fo l lowinq cond i t ions : '

3 r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s of 0, IS, and 30 seconds , 2 r e c a l l L

c o n d i t i o n s , e i t h e r d i s t a n c e + l o c a t i o n c r l o c a t i o n a l c n e , and 3 4

movement l e n g t h s of 10, 20, o r 40 cm. (performing a l l p o s s i b l e

c o n d i t i o r s results i n 3 x 2 x 3 = !8 movements).

Pour attempts a t e a c h endpoint were t e s t e d . Raw d a t a was

collected on p r e v i o u s l y prepared d a t a sheets . - Raw d a t a scores C wore conver tad- to s c o r e s f o r a b s o l u t e e r ro r , c o n s t a n t e r r o r , and

v a r i a b l e error i n t h e ccrnputat ional s e c t i c n of the c o m ~ u t s r

s t a t i s t i c a l package used. The genera tsd e r r o r scor f s wsre

s u b j e c t e d to d e s c r i p t i v e statistical a n a l y s i s a n d a n a l y s i s

of v a r i a n c e u s i n g pr.0gram.e BHDPZV e o f t h e B i o m e d i c a l C o m p u t e r

Programs P-Series ( D i x o n and Blown, 1977) . The d e s i g n t e s t e d by

t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s was a 3 ( a g e s ) r 3(aevemsnt l e n g t h s ) x

3 ( r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s ) x 2 (nmvement cues) f a c t o r i a l d e s i g n w i t h

repeated seasnres a n all b u t t h e f i r s t f a c t o r . T r i a l s effects

were n o t of i n t e r e s t i n t h i s s t u d y acd were n o t a n a l y z e d . In

a d d i t i o n , i n i t i a l a n a l y s e s f o r each a g e group v e r e ~ e r f o r ~ e d t o

ascertain w h e t h e r sex differencas at a n y age b e t w e e n b o y s a n d

girls e x i s t e d . Yhon no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f srences a t / d

any aqe between b o y s a n d g i r l s were f o u n d , sex uas n o l c n g e r

c o n s i d e r e d i n subsequen t a n a l y s e s .

V . P r o c e d u r e

An i n t r o d u c t o r y t a l k was given t o each g r o u p a s a w h o l e ,

after which e a c h s u b j e c t was r e m o v e d from c l a s s t o be tested

i n d i v i d u a l l y i n the room ~ r o v i d e d b y s c h o o l a u t h o r i t i e s . Subjects

vere a l l o u e d t o a c q u a i n t t h e m s e l v e s w i t h the s u r r c u n d i n g s a f t e r

b e i n g seated a t t h e t a b l e a n d vere asked f o r their date of birth .

a t t h i s t i n e . T h e f o l l o w i n g set of f a m i l i a r i z i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s

vere given: x - -5

s

" T h i s is the a p p a r a t u s we will be using to d o cur

e x p e r i m e n t s . I t is c a l l e d a s l i d e bar and it works like this.

This part, t h e slide ( d e l a o n s t r a t e ) moves along this metal rod,

Why d o n ' t you t r y i t with your r i g h t ( l e f t ) hand? Have a t pour

own speed and in one c o n t i n u o u s movement (TRIAL),

You are gcing to be, making a l l y o u r Pavements with your eyes

c l o s e d . Try ancther one w i t h your eyes. t i g h t l y s h u 4 this time.

B e sure you can't see (TRIAL).

I t is v e r y i m p o r t a n t t h a t you keep your eyes shut d u r i n g a l l '

the movements: when I tell you to 'close y o u r e y e s * , shut them

and keep them s h u t u n t i l I t e l l you to open them again-,-po,you * -,

have any q u e s t i o n s so f a r ? (If so, r e p e a t ' the i n s t r u c t i o n s ) .

Some of the movements will be made from t h e s t a r t i n g

position I g i v e you to a stop that I will move to a p l a c e along

the metal r o d ( d e m o n s t r a t e ) . Let8s t r y a movement to t h e s t o p ,

S i t w i t h your h a n d s on t h e desk i n front of y o u , Close your e y e s .

I w i l l place your hand on t h e n o v e a k l e s l i d e and when 1 s a p Jmove

to t h e stop', move t h e s l i d e t o . t h e stop. Then place your hand -

back on t h e d e s k . (TBIBL, 18cm).

1

Open your eyes. ~ f t 6 r you have l e a r n e d , a movement by moving

to t h e s top, I w i l l ask you to repeat it after a waiting p e r i o d .

sometimes I w i l l start you i n the same p l a c e and ask ycu to make

the sane movement again but without the s t o p i n p l a c e to h e l p

you. Other t i n e s , I w i l l s t a r t you i n a different p l a c e and ask

you to Bove t o the place where the stop was. Let's try one of

each k i n d . (TRIALS, 22 cm f o r d i s t a n c e p l u s l o c a t i o n ; _ 12, then 24 =--

w

cm for locaticp a l o n e ) . . '-A

*

Do yon unders tapd e v e r y t h i n g s o f a r or would you l i k e t

over t h e instructions aqain?o& (repeat i f - n q c e s s a r y ) . ,

ahen the e x p e r i m e n t e r was s a t i s f i e d t h a t the sob ject fully

comprehended what was r e q u i r e d , the experiment p r o c e e d e d a s

outlined i n the following i n s t r u c t i o n s spec i f ic to Experiment 1.

"we are going t o do a series of moveaents. I will tell you

how to each movement before ue begin each one. Begin . a n d \ \

end e a c h m'ovement w i t h your hands p l a c e d on the desk i n front of

pan. Each time we do a movement, I w i l l give you these ,

i n s t r u c t i o n s : *

F i r s t , I w i l l s ay 'close your eyes' . Then , I w i l l p l a c e your 4

'.- - hand o n t h e s l i d e , When X say naove t o t h e s t o p u , move t h e s l i d e

to the s t o p . Af te r y o u h a v e made t h e aoveaent , p l a c e yonr hand

backhan the t a b l a and reaeaber t o k e e p y o u r eyes shut. Yhen I -

replace y o n r h a n d on t h e s l i d e , 1 w i l l say e i t h e r 'rake t h e same

movement1 which m e a n s t h a t yon m i l l s t a r t i n the same place a n d

move the same d i s t a n c e t o t h l a c e w h e r e the s t o g uas, o r , I P w i l l say *move to where the s t o p was* which m e a n s t h a t you w i l l

be s t a r t i n g i n a different place b u t w i l l move t o uhere t h e s t o p -

was, Then , follcw t h e i n s t r u c t i o n , w h i c h e v e r one i t i s , Then

p l a c e y o u r hand back o n t h e table. You w i l l hawe four t r i e s a t

r e c a l l i n g each movement and I w i l l give y o u i n s t r u c t i c e s on how

t o make the a o v e a e n t t a c h time, After t h e fourth t r y , I w i l l say

' o p e n y o u r epes* and y o n c a n open t h e n t h e n . Do you^ h a v e any

q u e s t i o n s l n (If so, r e p e a t t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s ) .

Porn p u p i l s were subjectively deemed not t o have fully

c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s : d a t a f a r these s u b j e c t s was

d i s c a r d e d a l t h o u g h they uera testad t o a v o i d a n y p r o b l e m s w i t h

the i r peers.

Upon c o a p l e t i o n of the- s u b j e c t s were i n f o r s a l l y \ 7.

quizzed c o n c e r n i n g any rehearsal s t r a t e g i e s w h i c h t h e y m i g h t have

d e v e l o p e d . Subjects were as$ed: n ~ o " , d i d -you try t o reme~ber t h e

movements w h i l e you vere wai t ing t c repeat them?". Iha f e u

subjects u h o were u n a b l e to r e s p o n d vere further prompted with

t h e q u e s t i o n : n D i d f o u remember how f a r ycu moved c r w h e r g you

~ o v e d to?*. R e s p c n s € s > were recorded on the subject's d a t a s h e e t s .

C,, 3 e s u l t s

I

Bask d e s c r i p t i v e - statistics f o r each of t h e f a c t o r s t e s t e d

a t each aqe group are given i n Tables 13 (absolute error), l b e

( c o n s t a n t error), and 1c (variable error]. C e l l means a n d

standard deviations from the a n a l y s i s of va r i ance p r o v i d e d i n

Taples Id ( abso lu te error), le (constant e r r o r ) , a n d If ( v a r i a b l e a

e r ro r ) .

The m a i n effects o f age; ~ovenent length, r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l

length, and available movement cdes were a l l s t a t i s t i c a l l y

s i g n i f i c a n t for all t h r e e dependent errar measuqea ( ~ d b l e l g ) . >

In addition, the following i n t e r a c t i o n effects were s t a t i s t i c a l l y

s i g ~ i f icant ( T a b l e 1 h) :

2 * 1 . movement l e n g t h b y age for a l l degaedent error neasures m

vfth error f n c r e a s i q as towetent l e n g t h *=creased '7

2 , retention i n t e r v a l length by , age for a 1 1 d e p e n d e n t error

aeasures with error incr~asing a s r e t e n t i o n interval l e n g t h

i n c r e a s e d \

5

\ DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND ABIA~,YSIS OF VABI BBCE DATA b

POR EXPERIRBBT 1

~ab' le .la: D e s c r i p t i v e stati 'st ics of absolute error (Expt 1)

GRADE 6 GBADB 3 h

KI-.DER MOVBMEBT LEB[;TH X SD X SD. X SD

0 SEC 3 - 0 4 1.26 3,85 l m 2 7 4 - 2 0 l m 1 9 . . 15 SEC 3,39 1.30 4 . 1 5 Q 1 ~ 2 6 . 5 . 1 1 1,25

BOVBEEUT CUBS

--s

Table Ib: Descriptive statistics of constant error (Expt I)

GRADE 6 GRADE 3 K I N D E R HOVBI!IBET LENGTH X SD X SD X SD

15 SBC -0.35 0.77 -0.15 0.78 ' 0.42 0.61

30 SEC -2.28 1.19 -2.16 1.06 -1.45 1.05

QOVEUENT CUBS

T a b l e Ic: ~ e s c r i p t i v e statistics of variable error CExpt 1 ) .

GRADE 6 GRADE 3 KISDEB c LIOVEHI$llT

LEIGTfi X SD X SD X SD

10 Cff \ 1.93 0.38 1.93 0.29 2.43 0.18

RETEETION INTERVAL

0 SBC 1.74 0.41 1.97 0.3'8 2.19 0.40-

t 5 SEC

30 SBC

HOVEHElT CUES

T a b l e Id: D e s c r i p t i v e statist ic's of dell\ means f o r - a n a l y s i s of variance of a b s o l u t e error ( E r p t 1)

CELL G R A D E 6 - X SD

G R A D E 3 K I N D E R

Bote: L l = l O . cm, L2=20 cm, L3=40 cm Tl=Osec, T2=15 sec, T3=30 sec C1= D + I., C2= L ALONE

8 Table le: D e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s of cell means for

a n a l y s i s of variance of constant error (Expt 1 )

CELL GRADE 6 GRADE 3 KINDER

L l T l C l L 2 T I C 1 L3T 1C1 L 1 T 1 C 2 L 2 T 1 C 2 L 3 T l C 2 LbT2C1 L 2 T 2 C 1 ~ 3 ~ 2 ~ 1 ~ 1 F 2 C 2 L2T 2 C 2 L 3 T 2 C 2 L 1 T 3 C I L 2 T 3 C 1 L 3 T 3 C 1 L 1 T 3 C 2 L 2 T 3 C 2 L 3 T 3 C 2

Hots: L 1 - 1 0 cm, L2=20 cm, L3=4O cm T l = O s e c , T 2 = 1 5 sec, T3=30 sec C1= D + L, C2= L ALONE

Table If: Descriptive statistics of cell means for analysis of variance of variable error (gxpt 1)

CELL G R A D E 6. GBADE. 3 KINDER

Note: L1=10 cm, L2=20 cm, L3=40 cm Tl=Osec, 12-15 sec, T3=30 sec C1= D + L, C2= L ALOHE -

/'

Table lg: Analysis of variance table for absolute error (Expt I)

SOH OF HEAR SOU RCE SQUARES DF SQUARE F P

MEAN 3 1027.4 1 31027.6 1238.95 < O e O I A 604.9 2 302.4 12.08 <0 .01

I ERROR 2178.8 87 25.0

L L X A E R R O R

T T x A ERROR

L x T L x T x A ERROR

C C x A *

ERROR

L x C L x C x A E R R O R

, T x C T x C x A ERROR

L x T x C 23.3 4 5.8 32.70 < O e O 1 LxTxCXA . 8.8 , - 8 1.1 60 16 <O.O1 ERROR 62.0 340 0 • 2

Rote: A=age, L=movement length, T=retention interval, C=cues

Table 1h: Analysis of *ariance table for constant error (Expt 1)

sun OF S O U R C E SQUARES

L 1800.6 t X A . 6 * 8 ERROR 40,6

H E A N DP S Q U A R E

1 428.7 2 73 . 4

87 6 0

E x T L x T x A E R R O R

I

C C x A E R R O R

L X C L X C X A E R R O R

T x C T X C X A ERROR

a \

L x T x C 639.9 4 159.2, 4727.86' t0.01 LxTxCXA 0.6 8 0.1 2.35 0.02 ERROR 11.9- 348 0 . 0 3

' 6

Note: A=age, L=movement length,, retention interval, C=cues

t

Table li: A n a l y s i s of variance t a b l e for variable error (Expt 1)

SUH OF M E A N SOURCE SQUARES D F SQUARE P P

HEAN 7622.2 1 7622*2 2380.56 <Om01 A 83.6 2 .&la8 12.54 <0*01 ERROR 290.0 87 3* 3

L L X A ERROR

T T x A ERROR

L X T L x T x ERROR

L x C O e 7 L X C X A O e 1 E R R 0 3 . 3 . 1

T x C 3 . 5 T X C X A 0.2 ERROR 3 . 8

L X T X C 0 . 5 , 4 0, 4 26.17 <O*O1 L x T x C x A 0 5 8 0 06 3.94 C.0 .SO 1 ,

ERROR 5 .2 3U0 0 . 0 2

Note: A=age, movement length,' rete ten ti& interval, cues

i. Movement Leagth

Collapsed ovsr all conditions of age, r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l ,

an3 arailsble movsmant c u e s , tbera is a statistically s i g n i f i c a n t

differeace due to m v a a e n t length for all t h r e e dependent er ror

measures. These r a s u l t s are p a r t r a y e d g r a p h i c a l l y in f i g u r e s 4a

(absolute e r r o r ) , 4 b ( c o n s t a n t errsr) , snd 4c (variable error),

i n which t h e mean 3ependent measoras f o i a11 ages together a r e

p l o t t a d a g a i n s t maranent length, I n a d d i t i o n , t h e d e p e n d e n t error

measures f ~ r ench i n d i v i d u a l age g m u p a r e s i q u l t s n o o u s l p

p l o t t e d .

A p o s t e r i c r r i a n a l y s i s reveals t h a t t h e e f f ec t of aoreaent

l e n g t h is n a t u n i f o r m o v e r the t h ree age g r o u p s . No s i g n i f i c a n t

d i f f e r e n c z s be tween 10 and 20 cr m o v e r e n t s were seen a t any age.

Bowever, w h i l e g r a d e 6 subjects s h o v e d no l e n g t h ef iect a t a l l ,

g r a d e 3 subjects p r o d u z e d g r e a t e r err3rs a t 40 cm than a t

10 =r a n d k i n d e r g a r t e n sabjsc ts shows3 differences between 00

cm movements and b ~ t h 10 a n d 20 cm ones.

I f a b s o l u t e e r r o r is t a k e n a's an i n d i c a t i o n of the a c c u r a c y

o f t h e c r i t e r i o n navement r e p r o d u c t i o n i n d e p e n d e n t of t h e

d i r e c t i o n of the error, t h e r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that c h i l d r e n o f p a l l

ages testsd r e p r o d u c e d shorter movements a re a c c u r a t e l y t h a n d l o n g e r ones in terns of a b s o l u t e v a l u e s . T h i s re-sult can b2

i n t e r p r e t e d i n o n e of two ways. F i r s t , f rom a developmental point -

of V ~ P W , t h e r e s u l t s - a g r e e with a proxiaal-distal t h e o r y ' of

m 3 v e e n t c o n t r o l a c q u i s i t i o n b y c h i l d r e n ( ~ r a t t y , 1967) . ~f

c h i l d r e n l e a r n t o perform s k i l l s p r o x i m a l to t h e midline of tha

body n o r % sasily than those which are more d i s t a l , i t would be

expected t h a t s h o r t e r movements which b e g i n and e n d close to the

midline would be r e p r o d u c s d more a c s u r a t e l y t h a n f onger onas

which take a t l e a s t the aovement - e n d p o i n t f a r t h l r away from t h e

m i d l i n e . The a b s o l u t e e r r o r results show t h i s t* b e so. Second,

from a n i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g p o i n t o f v i a v , i t could be argued S

' t h a t a l o n g e r movement c o n t a i n s nore i n f o r n a ' t i o n than a shortPr

one, i n a n a n a l o g y to F i t t s Law ( F i t t s , 1954) , and i s more

s u s c e p t i b l e t o t i n o i s e " ( t h a t is , e r ro r ) d u r i n g r e p r o d u c t i o n .

T h i s app roach is more useful i n e x p l a i n i n g t h e age

difference vhich is apparent upon o b s e r v a t i o n of the errors for

each movement l e n g t h f o r each age group. If, a s the l i t e r a t u r e

i l l u s t r a t e s i s so f o r v i s u a l a n d v e r b a l tasks, t h s a b i l i t y to

p r o c e s s p r o p r i o c e p t i v e i n f o r n a t i o n i n c r e a s e s uith age, a b s o l u t e

zrror at e a c h movement l e n g t h s h o u l d decrease a s a g e i n c r e V a s e s .

T h i s o c c u r s since the i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t e n t of a g i v e n m o v e a l n t

l a n g t h decreases a s a f r a c t i o n o f t h e t o t a l c a p a c i t y of ths

subject a s c h i l d r e n grow o l d e r . Aga in , the a b s o l u t e e r ro r data -.

show t h i s t o b e the c a s e .

t t l t : i4BS0LUTE ERROR VS. HOVB8EI'P LEBG'PH 4B: COPSTAIT ERROR VS. HOVEMEIT LEHGTB 4C: VARIABLE ERROR VS. ROVEIIEIIT LEBlGTH

Figure 4 a

o Mean . 5

Kindergarten m Grade 3 A Grade 6/7

-. Movement - Length (cm )

Figure 4b . &-

~ M e a n ,

Kindergarten Grade 3

A Grade 6/7

Movement Length ( cm )

Figure 4c

0 Mean - Kindergarten Grade 3

A Grade 6/7

Movement Length ( cm )

From a p r o c e d u r a l s t a n d p o i n t , o n e a n o m a l y c a n b e i n t r o d u c e d

i n t o t h e r e s u l t s i f care i s n o t t a k e n by t h e experimenter t o

properly define t h s a p p r o x i m a t e endpoints of t h e l o n g e s t

mqvements. If t h e endpoint i s l o c a t e d such t h a t it is a t t h e

l i m i t of t h e mcvement r a n g e of t h e -subject (this i s p a r ' t i c u l a r l y J

i m p o r t a n t fo r y o u n g e r , s m a l l e r subjects), t h e s u b j e c t w i l l

r e p r o d u c e t h e movement extrersely a c c u r a t e l y n o m a t t e r w h a t t h e

l e n g t h of t h e r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l . Presn~ably this o c c u r s s i n c e

the s u b j a c t must s i a p l y remember t o move a s far a s is p h y s i c a l l y

p o s s i b l e , a rehearsa l s - t r a t e g y w i t h a n e a s i l y r eaember -ed v e r b a l

l a b e l . The p e r f o r m a n c e i s t h e n q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t o f a t t e n d i n g t o

p r o p r i o c e p t i v e cues which are s u p p o s e d l y b e i n g tested.

I n t e r e s t i n g l y , when s u b j e c t s were i n f o r m a l l y asked, "DO y o u

t h i n k i t i s easier t o remember t h e s h o r t ones or t h e l o n g onesan,

58 of 90 s u b j e c t s s a i d t h a t longer m o v a k e n t s *ere Bere e a s i l y

remembered w h i l e 26 s a i d t h a t shorter o n e s were easier t o

r e p r o d u c e . The r e m a i n i n g 6 expressed no p r e f e r e n c e . C l e a r l y , t h e

subjects* p e r c e p t i o n s cf t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e s were c o n t r a r y t o

their ,actual p e r f o r m a n c e s .

T h e d a t a f o r c o n s t a n t e r r o r , which c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d a s an

i n d i c a t i o n of t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e e r ro r a r o u n d t h e c r i t e r i o n ,

shovs t h a t a s movement length i n c r e a s e s , c o n s t a n t e r ro r becomes

m o r e n e q a t i v s . T h i s is, a t l e a s t i n p a r t , i n a g r e e m e n t wit6 t h e

central t e n d e n c y effeOt d r s c r i b e d by Ste lmach (1970) arncn'cj

o t h e r s , The relatively l o n g 40 ca . movements were s u b s t a n t i a l l y

u n d e r s h o t u p o n r e p r o d u c t i o n , a f i n d i n g w h i c h is i n k e e p i n g w i t h

t h e central t e n d e n c y concept. T h e 20 cm, a o v e m e n t s were a l s o d

u n d e r s h o t by a l l age g r o u p s , however, a f i n d i n g no t e x p e c t e d i n

view of t h e f a c t t h a t 20 cm. m o v e m e n t s are closer i n l e n g t h t o

t h e short 10 c a m m o v e m e n t s which for the mean of a l l ages.were

o v e r s h o t a s predicted by c e n t r a l tendency ,theory. N e v e r t h e l e s s ,

t h e 20 cm..movements d i d o c c u p y a n intermediate p o s i t i o n between 4

10crn. and 40 en. while, with a d u l t s , one might n o t e x p e c t a

Ld movement a s short a s 20 cm, t o be u n d e r s h o t , fcr c h i l d r e n , a 20

cm. movement may w e 1 be a long cne a n d , t h e r e f o r e , s u b j e c t t o 1

b-- *- -a' . ~ v e r s ~ o o t i n g , *

A f u r t h e r mitigating f a c t o r i s t h a t e v e n the 10 cm.

movements were u n d e r s h o t b y t h e kindergarten a n d g r a d e 3

subjects. T h e r e a p p e a r s then, to be a t e n d e n c y to tcward 1

u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g a l l n c v e m e n t l e n g t h s a t t h e y o u n g e r a g e s , a

tendency which gradua l ly d i s a p p e a r s as c h i l d r e n take on the more /' 4

adult-like strategies presumably e v i d e n t i n t h e G r a d e 617

subjects.

v a r i a b l e e rcor can b e t h o u g h t of a s t h e v a r i a b i l i t y a r o u n d a

c r i t e r i o n wh ich i s s u b j e c t d e f i n e d r a t h e r t h a n a r o u n d the i m p o s e d

c r i t e r i o n d e f i n e d d u r i n g the l e a r n i n g t r i a l . I t was t h e @

e x p e r i m e n t e r ' s i m p r e s s i o n a s t e s t i n g p r o c e e d e d t h a t t h e f o u r

attempts s u p p o s e d l y b e i n g made a t r e p r o t l u c i n g t h e l e a rned

c r i t e r i o n movement were n o t b e i n g made b y t h e s u b j e c t s with t h a t

i d e a i n aind. It was f e l t t h a t t h e f irst ~ o v e m e n t was a

l eg i t imate a t t e m p t t o r e ~ r o d u c e t h e c r i t e r i o n : houever , the

r ema in ing t h r e e Mere n o t a t t e m p t s t o r e p r o d u c e t h e criterion b u t

r a t h e r were a t t e m p t s t o r e c r e a t e t h e f i rs t r e p r o d u c t i c n t r i a l .

The changes i n v a r i a b l e error w i t h mcvement l e n g t h are

r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l a l t h o u g h t h e o v e r a l l e f fect i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y

significant. This s u g g e s t s t h a t s u b j e c t s map be q u i t e c a p a b l e of

r e d u c i n g their e r r o r a r c u n d a c r i t e r i o n l e n g t h o r Iccation,

r e g a r d l e s s of t h e length i n v o l v e d p r o v i d e d t h e y a r e a l l o u e d t o

choose t h e i r own c r i t e r i o n , There i s e v i d e n c e g a t h e r e d w i t h a d u l t

s u b j e c t s t h a t when s u b j e c t s a r e a l l o w e d t o preselect t h e i r own

c r i t e r i o n movement l e n g t h , a b s c l u t e error is less than t h a t of

m o v e a e 6 t s u h i c h a r e of a c o n s t r a i n e d l e n g t h (Kelso a n d S t e lmac ,h ,

1 9 7 6 ) . This was a t t r i b u t e d t o the a b i l i t y a f f o r d e d the h i g h e r

p r o c e s s i n g c e n t r e s to prepare f o r i n c o m i n g p r o p r i o c e p t i v e

f e e d b a c k d u r i n g p r e s e l e c t e d movements , a c a p a c i t y not a v a i l a b l e

d u r i n g u n c e r t a i n , c o n s t r a i n e d r o v e n e n t s (Jones, 1974) . The

s u b s e q u e n t l y a c q u i r e d motor trace i n t h e preselected c o , n d i t i o n

tY' El .rl d

U

d

Q,

.

P4

tJ, d

.rl M

3 a

FIGURE 5 : THE EFFECT OF RETEITIOI INTERVAL LERGTB OI ERROR HEASORBS

5A: ABSOLUTE ERROR VS RETE WTION INTERVAL LEEGTB 5B: COHSTAIT ERROR BS, B E T E I T I O l I U T E R V I L LBHGTR 5C: VARIABLE ERROR VS* RETEaTION IRTERVAL LBSGTH

Figure 5a

0 Mean Kindergar ten Grade 3

A Grade W7

Retention Interval ( sec )

67 i

I < Figure 5b J ..=A '

0 Mean Kindergar ten

- m Grade 3 A Grade 6/7

Retention Interval ( sec )

0 Mean : Kindergar ten Grade 3

A Grade ' 6/7

. Retention Interval (sec)

,

F i g u r e 5a r e s e m b l e s c l o s e l y t h e pattern of t r a a e ' d e c a y s e e n with

a d u l t s r e c a l l i n g v e r b a l m a t e r i a l i n a s h o r t term memory pa rad igm

( P e t e r s o n a n d P e t e r s o n , 1959 ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e trace' d e c a y

t h e o r y h a s nevar been f u l l y tasted w i t h c h i l d r e n a s s u b j e c t s .

N e v e r t h e l e s s , S m o t h e r g i l l (1 973) a n d H a i t h (197 1) among o t h e r s

h a v e p r o v i d e d me e v i d e n c e t h a t v i s u a l i n f o r m a t i o n decays d u r i n g f 7 %

s h o r t t e 9 m o r p tasks p e r f o r m e d by c h i l d r e n .

T h e absolute error resul ts of the p r e s e n t ' s t u d y s u g g e s t t h a t Y

c h i l d r e n i n the m b t o r domain d e m o n s t r a t e f o r g e t t i n g d u r i n g an

u n f i l l e d r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l . It i s t e m p t i n g tovvieu t h i s a s

d e c a y of ans h p p o t h e s i z ' e d memory trace: however , t h e f i n d i n g s o f

Sroufe ( 1971 ) t h a t c h i l d r e n m a i n t a i n a less s t a b l e s t a t e of

a t t e n t i o n d u r i n g s h o r t term memory t a s k s c o m p l i c a t e s matters.

; T h e pcurer r a ~ r o d u c t i o n s o f c r i t e r i o n movements a t 30 s e c o n d s

r e l a t i v e t o 0 a n d 15 s e c o n d s may be , a t l eas t i n p a r t ,

a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a l o s s cf a t t e n t i o n t o , t h e t a s k wh ich occurs over

time, p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h t h e y o u n g e s t c h i l d r e n . S i n c e no measure

of a t t e n t i o n was made d u r i n g this s t u d y , (a point which can be

made a b o u t v i r t u a l l y all short term memory s t u d i e s ) , t h e r e s u l t s L

a r s s u p p o r t i v e but not ~ r c o f of t race itecai. Th-is p c l n t couxd be

c i r c u s r e n t e d by t r e a t i n g attentiaa and trace decay as trcl si&es

of the same c c i n r a t h e r t h a n a s two d i f f e r e n t c o m p o n e n t s of motor b -

p e r f o r m a n c e .

k

2%

0

Yd

-*

I c,

u

v1 m

b

L1

vl

U

W0

18

*d

@+

Jk

Vl

W

Rt

dU

a

b, W

(I

~O

,~

~O

IQ

~

UY

aw

Od

01

0

cb .d

I

c(

@O

d+

,

.r

(M

YF

c

a

tm

QW

Xd

3

YY

y+

,C

TU

.I

P,

c

Q)

CI

UY

dl

Q)

a#

ll

ld

c

b~

@f

fo

aQ

)

AI

Vl

dU

dc

l

+J

Q)

+r

vm

+'

id m

a,

a

+,

a

@.

a

d@

A@

A+

J

&.

I#

.+

,

do

@

'4

(3

id+,rtr+,aa,

c+. 3

e

u

c

a, a

rm

vr

.r

lu

d*

id

+-

I"

@

a, *

zm

a*

rc

t:

cn

v-4 o

td

a

db

rU

f&

-

v-4 r

~-

+r

c

r)

a8

+1

# ,

Q1

Wd

4

cl fd

a).

WU

*,

0

u

.C

cO

Q

,V

)4

ct

U*

da

,

(d

.*

fl

C1 +

'Pa

5

3

+V

+'

4J

L4 P

O)

r(

+J

oa

w

* 0

0

+'

d1

L1

44

uw

oa

au

-

MU

-r

lQ

)a

,U

A

m

*r

+u

a

Y

u' rC1

%

* Y

cl

~.

r)

vl

aa

ul

w

Q,

+J

on

ua

4

00

,L

,W

y.

Io

,

34

-3

34

w

a

~a

wr

uo

, a

Cl

O

MA

W4

&.I

4

#a

a*

,+

rM

.

00

o

+r

$u

ZR

k -4

QI

cct g

+r

ww

ac

Uy

V

] 4'

rl

rw

a

wy

.1

a,

m~

ra

U

rl

C(

O0

)O

(

d-

W

U

rJ

3

.p

U

a, v a r i a b l e error data can ~ o s t e a s i l y be i n t e r p r e t e d a s a n i n c r e a s e .

i n t h e u n c e r t a i n t y of t h e subjects i n r e p r o d u c i n g acverents

following l o n g e r r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s , S t i l l , t h e increase i a

v a r i a b l e error with r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l coald a l s o be i n t e r p r e t e d .

a s b e i n g the result of d e c r e a s e d a t t e n t i o n being p a i d t o t h e t a s k

after longer retention i n t e r v a l s . I f t h i s uas so, tbe h y ~ c t h e s i s -

regarding the subjects' s t r a t e g y d u r i n g the r e p e a t e d measures

would not necessarily be d i s c o u n t e d .

iii, A v a i l a b l e E o v f n e n t Cues -

1 P

S u b j e c t s yx" e a f f o r d e d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e p r o d u c e l e a r n e d ; * /

movements w i t h either r c v e h e n t e x t e n t a n d e n d p o i n t information - - *

a v a i l a b l e , o r w i t h e n d p c i n t inf o r a a t i o n alone. T h e l i t e r a t u r e

ts t h a t l o c a t i o n i s a r e h e a r s a b l e cue not a s subject t o

trace decay a s the ncn-rehearsable extent i n f o r m a t i c n , though t h e

true cha rac t e r i s t i c s of these t w o c u e s a r e not fully u n d e r s t o o d .

T h e da ta in t h i s study show that, collapsed over a l l c o n d i t i o n s

I of age, aovement* l e n g t h , a n d retention interval l e n g t h , there i s +

a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference between t h e t u o roveineat

cue s i t u a t i o n s f o r a l l t h e d e p e n d e n t e r ror aeasures. The results -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -- - - - -

are portrayed g r a p h i c a l l y in ~ i g n r e s 6a (absolute e r r c r ) , 6b - - - - - - - - - -

( c o n s t a n t error) , a n d 6c (variable error) .

F I G U R E 6 : THE EFFECT OF L#)YEl¶EIT CUES 01 E R R O R a ~ a ~ n a x q

6A: ABSOLUTE B ~ B O B VS. HOVELIEIIT CUBS 6 8 : CbHSTAFtP IfElROB VS, MOVEMEET CUES- 6C: VARIABLE EBROB VS, HOVERERS' CUES

73

- Figure 6a

0 Mean a Kindergar ten

Grade 3 A Grade 6/7

txstame & tocation w o r r Alone

74

Figure 6b

0 Mean Kindergarten Grade 3 ,

A ,Grade 6 0

Available Movement Cueb

Figure 6c

0 Meani.-- ~ ind&~ar ten Grade 3

A Grade W7

/

d Available Movement Cu6

~ h i l e t h e results f o r the d e p e n d a n t measures ray b e

; t a t i s t i c i l l y s i q n i f i c a n t , s x a m i n a t i ? n of t h e means r e v e a l s v e r y

l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the two c o n a i t i o n s , A p o s t e r i o r i

a n a l y s i s r evea l s ao significant d i f f e r e n c e , B s v e r t h e l e s s , t h e fr

a i f f e r a n c a for a b s o l n t b e r r a r i s c o n s i s t e n t though s m a l l for a l l

age q r o u p s v i t h the d i s t a n c e p l u s l o c a t i o n group producing

s1f; lht lp less u n s i g n e d error t h a n t h e g r o u p h a v i n g o n l y location . inf o r n a t i o n . T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t , w h i l e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o recal l

~ a d e by d i s t s n c e inforsation is s m a l l , i t does a n h a n c a t h e

i This f i n d i n g i s i n t e r e s t i n g i n view of t h e s u b j e c t s g

C?

p e r c e p t i . o n s of the i r tssk performsace, When a s k e d a b o u t what c u e s

sere a t t e n d e d t o d a r i n g t h e r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l , o n l y 6 of 30

subjzcts made any r e f e r e n c e t o d i s t a n ~ e ( f o r e x a n p l e ,

I; rememberel bow far I m,vedn) even when d i n t l n c e was a reliable

cue. R o s t subjects uera location o r i e n t e d in their approach,

p e c c e t v i n g t h e i r s t r a t e g i e s i n such ways a s just renenbered

w h e r e it ( t h e s t o p ) wasm.

C o n s t a n t error ags in shored a s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t , indicating

t h a t morerents mad2 with l o c a t i o ~ in£ormation a l o n e t ended t o be

nnitersbot r e l a t i v e t o moveaen'ts made with b o t h distance and- *

l o z i t i o n informati~n t 3 g e t h ~ r . T h i s r e s u l t h a s n o t b e e n reported L

with a d a l t s and t h r r e * a p p & r s t o be n3 theoretical base t o

e x p l a i n i t .

The d i f f e r e n c e i n v a r i a b l e e r r o r is shown t o be

s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant. Houeve r , e r a m i n a t i o n of t h e maans

r evea l s v e r y l i t t b e d i f f e r e n c e be tween t h e twc c o n d i t i o n s

a l t h o u g h t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s c o n s i s t e n t f o r all age groups. If

there is more usefal movement i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e when subjects C - a r e g i v e n both distance and l o c a t i o n , then it might be e q s c t e d

t h a t t h e i r respcnses would be less v a r i a b l e a b o u t t h e i r cwn I

4

s e l f - d e f i n e d c r i t e r i a movement. Uhile s t a t i s t i c a l l y t h i s

a p p e a r s t o b e t h e case, i n p r a c t i c a l terms there i s little t o

choose i n * , v a r i a k l e errot be tween t h e t w o c o n d i t i o n s ,

iq. I n t e r a c t i o n Ef iects *-

T h e r e a r e numerous interaction effects which c a n be

considered given the. d a t a i n T a b l e s I f , 9, and b . ZYcst i m p o r t a n t

p c i n t s of d i s c u s s i o n c a n b e made b y referring t o t h e two way

i n t e r a c t i o n s seen w i t h a b s o l u t e error a s the d q e n d e n t measure.

The other d e p e n d e n t errcr m e a s u r e s show a ' s imi lar pattern t o t h a t

of a b s o l u t e error a n d little a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n to

t h a t discussed i n t h e m a i n effects s e c t i o n s of this c h a p t e r or L that t o f o l l o w c c n c e r n i n g t w o - way i n t e r a c t i o n s f o x a b s o l u t e

error. The s i g n i f i c a n t three-way i n t e r a c t i o n s f o r a t s o l u t e error

' will a l s o be briefly d i s c u s s e d .

P e r h l p s more Lnterestf ng t h a n t h o s e two-way i n t e r a c t i o n s

w h i c h are s t a t i s t i z a l l y significant are t h e t u o which are n o t ,

a l t h o u g h null results s h o u l d be c a u t i o u s l y considered.

First, i n t e r a c t i o n 3f a r a i l a b l e movement cnes with age is

n o t s i g n i f i c a n t . This r e s u l t , which is best seen i n t h e p a r a l l e l

nature of t h e l i n e s fo r the three age groti$s in F i g u r e Sa, dhows

t h a t the effect d e s c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n iii of t h i s c h a p t e r i s t h e

same 3t all a g e s . No age e f f e c t i n t h e a p p a r e n t s u p e r i o r i t y of

I d i s t a n c e p l u s l o c a t i o n o v e r l o c a t i o n a l o n e is s e e n . C h i l d r e n a t

a l l ages t e s t e d d e m o n s t r a t e s l i g h t l y less e r r o r w i t h b o t h cues-

p r e s e n t s u g g e s t i n g that the way i n which p r o p r i o c e p t i v e cues a r e

u s e 3 is.fixed'bp t h e age of f i v e and i s no t a l t e r e d b y the a g e of . , \

t w e l v e . It is in teres t ing t o note, however, t h a t f o r adults, the

superiority of distance p l u s location over l o c a t i o n a l o n e is .

dif f icolt t o d e m o n s t r a t e .

\ Second, t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of movement l e n g t h with ~OVement CU8

is a l s o n 3 t significant, meaning that p c o p r i o c e p t i v e p e r c e p t i o n . ----$--

~f a v a i l a b l e c u e s is the same i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e movement b e i n g

performed. ~ h k s is not s u r p r i s i n g given $hat t h e d i f f e r e n t

r o ~ e m e n t s tested4ia t h i s study were of t h e same class, differing . on ly* i n l e n g t h and not in t h a method o f pe r fo rmance . r'

Alth3agh t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of moverent cnes w i t h age uas not - .

s i g n i f i c a n t , t h e interactions of miemah l e n g t h and r e t e n t i o n "6

i n t a r r a l l e n g t h with age are both * $ t k a t i o t i c a l l p s i g n i f i c a n t . The ,

>

f o r m e r can be s e e n i n P i q u r e 4a, the l a t t e r in Figure Sa. I n

b o t h cases, the lines f o r t h e three age g r o u p s d e p a r t from

parallel, g r a p h i c a l l y s h o v i n g t h e i n t e r a c t i o n , I n t h e c a s e o f the

movement length b y age i n t e r a c t i o n , the two y o u n g e r g r o u p s show a

s i m i l a r r e s p o n s e t o roverent length, I t is t h e o l d e s t g r o u p which

diverges from t h e p a t t e r n of t h e o t h e r two, d i s p l a y i n g no effect

of aoveaent l e n g t h o n a k s a l u t c srror b e t w e e n 10 cm. and 20 c m .

movements. The i n c r e a s e i n a b s o l u t e error a t 40 cm, seen i n the

two y o u n g e s t g r o u p s is e v i d e n t i n t h e o l d e s t g r o u p a s ue l l ,

h o v e r e r . This i n d i c a t e s that a t t h e l o n g - e r movement l en 'g ths , t h e

effect vhich was in some uay buffered by t h e o l d e s t g r o u p a t

s h o r t e r lengths o c c u r s , e

I n the c a s e of t h e r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l by age i n t e r a c t i o n , it <

i s the youngest g r o u p w h i c h departs f rom t h e p a t t e r n of t h e o t h e r

two. rhe a b s o l u t e error f o r t h e . y o u a g e s t subjects increases

n a r k e d l y f o r ths 30 second r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l w h i l e t h e i n c r e a s e

for the two oldest g r o u p s is approximately l i n e a r with t h e

increase s e e n between 0 and 15 seconds. Ycunger children are

c l e a r l y more a f f e c t e d b y long retention intervals t h a n clder

children, 1h fact, t h i s disparity right- -expressed b~ e y i n g '-3. *

t h a t a_ s h o r t retention i n t e r v a l f o r an o l d e r chQld n i g h t *ell be

one f o r a y o u n g e r c h i l d . Y

Two o t h e r two-way i n t e r a c t i o n s a r e s t a t i s t i c a l l y

s i g n i f i c a n t . I h e s e are the l e n g t h by retention i n t e r v a l and t h e

r e t e n t i o n interval by a v a i l a b l e movement c u e s i n t e r a c t i o n s

p o r t r a y e d g r a p h i c a l l y i n Figures 7a and 7 b r e s p e c t i v e l y . The

fcrmer e f f e c t is the r e s u l t of t h e d e v i a t i c n of the 30 second

gronp of movements s h o r i n g a greater i nc rease i n error w i t h

mo,vement l e n g t h than t h e r a te o f i n c r e a s e seen b e t w e e n t h e too

shorter r e t e n t i c n i n t e r v a l s . T h i s implies t h a t t h e l c n g e r the

r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l , the more difficult i t b e c o e e s to r e p r o d u c e

t h o s s movements which arg most dif f i c n l t t c p e r f o r m . R e l a t i v e l y

speaking, t h e movements made a t t h e s h o r t e r r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s

are less susceptible t o t b s a o v e a e n t l e n g t h effect,

T h e r e m a i n i n g s i g n i f i c a n t two-way i n t e r a c t i o n to be

discussed h e r e is t h a t cf r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l by a v a i l a b l e

m v e m e n t cues. T h i s results from two b a s i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t s h a p e d

c u r v e s , o n e f o r d i s t a n c e plus l o c a t i o n , t h e c t h e r f c r l o c a t i o n

a l o n e ( F i g u r e 7b). The curve for d i s t a n c e p l u s l o c a t i o n a p p e a r s a

t o p l a t e a u a s t h e r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l i n c r e a s e s u h i l e t h e l o c a t i o n

a l o n e curve a p p e a r s t o accelerate as r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l

increases, This s u g g e s - t s t h a t the graater amount of -2

p r o p r i o c e p t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n - a v a i l a b l e i n ' t h e d i s t a n c e ~ l u s

l o c a t i o n c c n d i t i o n is of v a l u e a't t h e l o n g e r , r e t e n t i o n

. i n t e r v a l s . I t migh t be s p e c u l a t e d t h a t i f even l o n g e r r e t e n t i o n

FIGURE 7: I I T E R A C T I O I EFFECTS FROB ANaLYSIS OF V A R I A H C E II EXPERIBEBT 1

7 A : mVElfE )IT LE116TE BY RETEUTIOE IIITERVAL I IITERACTIOI 7B: B e T E I T I O I I I T E R V A L BY ROVEHEIT CUE IBTEBACTIOB

v o sec Q 15. set 030 seg

Retention Interval (set)

* - 434 - - -

1 b- -

- d - - * -

i n t e r v a l s were ~sea, location a l o n e might become inapepaate d r e

q n i c k l y t h a n t h e dista%ce p l u s l o c a t i o n c o n d i t i o n , i n d i c a t i n g a

*bnf f e r i n g * effect of some k ind of i n c r e a s e d sensor? iof ormation

on task difficulty,

Two sf gnif f c a n t thr& wa y i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h ahsolate atfox

and one f oar- wa y i n t e r a c t i o n invo lv i . ng age o c c u r r e d (Tab18 tg) . These were the movement length by r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l by age,

=atent ion mohment cue by age, and t h e aorement /J

l e n g t h by r e t e n t r/ on i n t e r v a l b y movement c u e by age i n t e r a c t i o n s .

B o t h of t h e three-wa J i n t e r a c t i o n s were exaninecl g r a p h i c a l l y P

and the nature of t h e interactions s n b j e c t i r e l y i n t e r p r e t e d ,

T h e s e complex interaction effects were deemed n o t t o c o n t r i b u t e ,/- L s u b s t a z l t i a l l y to t h e di ~ t t s s i o ~ of - t3ere lopren ta& t r e a d s and t h e i r '. - - \

\ a n a l y s i s i s not inc lnded here . ',

I t should be n o t e d t h a t t h e rek'ul ts of E x p e r i 8 e n t I r e l a t i n g

to sotor l e a r n i n g theory mast be viewed w i t h c a u t i o n , For ------ practical readns , a l l subjects performed 18 movements. s h i l e

"

i n statistical t e r n s this was handled by t h e use of repeated

measures statistical technigms, i n hoaan t e r m s , ' t h e b u i l d u p - -

'C - - - - - - - - - - - -

of proactive intarf erance (discaosed in Chapter 3) may have r-, - - - - - - - -

had s6ae effect which is i n c a l c u l a b l e , Bowever, it is ao4, %ST, - 9

u n r e a s ~ n a b l e t o suggest t h a t t b h effect'-;itigated against G

finding s i g n i f i c a n c e and t o propose c a u t i o n $s n o t to s u g g e s t

a l a c k of coaf ibnce i n the f i n d i n g s . ..

pd

CBAPTEB 3

Experiment 2

A. I n t reduction

P r o a c t i v e interference can b e regarded a s a buildup of

activity p r i o r to learning a specific task which i n h i b i t s r e c a l l

by c r e a t i n g a background of prior e x p e r i e n c e aga inst which i t is

d i f f i c u l t t o p i c k o u t t h e d e s i r e d r e s p o n s e during r e c a l l . Much

a t t e n t i o n h a s been g i v e n to i n t e r f e r e n c e effects a n d motor s h o r t

t e r ~ memory i n an attempt to evaluate the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s a

o f t r a c e decay and i n t e r f e r e n c e t o f o r g e t t i n g .

B e l a t i r e l y more research i n motor s k i l l s h a s been d e v o t e d t o

proact ive i n t e r f e r e n c e effects than r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e

ones, (an interesting s t a t e . o f . affairs when o n e c o n s i d e r s 'that, *

%. . i n v e r b a l l earn ing , p r o a c t i v e interference effects ci retention. 7

are of lesser magnitude than those of r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e

(Postaan, 196 1) . Since p r o a c t i v e i n t e r ' f e r e n c s was e a s i l y

generated in verkal I e < r n i n g studXes, it was strange to dlscover

durfng ear ly attempt-s t o transfer p r o a c t i v e interference s tua ie s .c

from $he verbal t o t h e motor domain t h a t there was no

demonstrable effect i n single t r i a l designs. Such a f a i l u r e was i

no doubt f r u s t r a t i n g f r c o the aspect of parsimony i n t h a t i t b

'argned a g a i n s t t h e existence of a common b e h a v i o u r a l law u h i c h ~W

encompassed both v e r b a l and motor l e a r n i n g , Among the s t u d i e s

r e p o r t i n g negative r e s u l t s fo r p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n m t o r

s h o r t term 8emorg were l lontagne and B i l l i x (1960) . and H i c k s a n d

Cohn ( 1975) . However, same evidence f o r p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e 4

i n m o t o r t a s k s was reported by Ascoli and Schmidt (1969) and

v i l l i a a s 11971) who r epo r t ed t h a t c r i t e r i o n movement r e c a l l uas e

j i n d i r e c t l y a f u n c t i o n ' of t h e Bumber of p r e v i o n s ~ o v e ~ e n t , t . I n s

1974, Burwitz discussed these i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s of motor

proactive i n t e r f e r e n c e e x p e r i m e n t s i n terms o f t h e c o g n i t i v e

c o n t r o l of motor b e h a v i o u r , r e f e r ~ i n g s p e c i f i c a l l y t o t h e i d e a of

d i r e c t e d f o r g e t t i n g .

B .*

w h i l e i n single t r i a l s d e s i g n s i n t .he motor 'domain p r o a c t i v e

interference i s not p roduced , it c a n b+ d e m o n s t r a t e d i n a r e v e r s e

o r d e r or. m u l t i p l e t r i a l d e s i g n ( ~ s c b l i a n d S c h m i d t , 1969) . I n

s u c h a design, subjects l e a r n a series of moveaents, t h e l a s t of

which is t h e c r i t e r i o n movaaent , then recall them i n reverse "

o r d e r . T h i s p r e v e n t s t h e first sovements of t h e series fzom b e i n g ?

d i s c a r d e d ( d i r e c t e d t o r g e t t i n g ) s i n c e , o n l i k & the subjects i n a

single trials d e s z g n , s u b f e ~ 3 s m u s t recall all aovellerits i n t h e

s e r i e s . B u r v i t z showsd that, in a rrr1tip;fe trf als i3esiga, '

p r o a c t i v e - i n t e r f e r e n c e c o u l d b e - e l i m i n a t e d by i n s t r u c t i n g

subjects t o i g n o r e t h e first four movements of a f i ' v e rovement

series. Thus i t was i l l u s t r a t e d t h a t s u c c e s s o r f a i l u r e t o n

g e n e r a t e p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n motor s h o r t term aemory

e x p e r i m e n t s was dependent upon p r o c e d n r a l d i f f e r e n c e s ,

s p e c i f i c a l l y whether or n o t s u b j e c t s ceuid p u r p o s e f u l l y f o r g e t

r a t er ia l deemed t o be t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t , Such e x p e r i m e n t a l , re s a l t s r - '.

are consistent with t h o s e t h e o r e t i c a l l y summarized b y ~urvitz ( 1974

who emphasized the impor t ance of directed forgetting as a hasic t

p r o c e s s i n avoiding a p o t e n t i a l l y d e b i l a t a t i n g b u i l d u p o f . p r o a c t i v e interference i n everyday s i t u a t i o n s . However, i t is "

- worthwhi le to note t h a t , l i k e v e r b a l l e a r n i n g , the amount of

p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e g e n e r a t e d i n motor l e a r n i n g s t u d i e s i s t

st ill l e s s than the amount of r e t r o a c t i v e interference ( P e p p e r

and Berman, 197 I) ,

&nother aspect of p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i;.rorthy of

d i s c u s s i o n here, ' t h a t being an i n c o n s i s t ' e n c y betveen the verbal

i and motor domains. E v e n t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t directed f o r g e t t i n g ,

> k it is stil l p o s s i b l e t o g e n e r a t e p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n a 3

Z

s i h g l s t r i a l d e s i g n f o r movements, b u t p o s s i b l e i n s i n g l e t r i a l

v e r b a l d e s i g n s . Barvitz a t t r i b u t e d this n o t to d i f i e r e d t

mechanisms o f l e a r n i n b a n d performance b u t to procedural

differences between experiments. In the motor domain, r e sponsas - - -

are measured on a cont inuous scale while i n v e r b a l s t u d i e s I

responses a r e b i n a r y , that is, either right or wrong, remembered C

o r f o r g o t t e n , with no way of kndwing the degree t o which t h e

nonsense s y l l a b l e s are remembered, A c c e p t i n g this e x p l a n a t i o n , we

can view t h e memory mechanisms rn verbal and motor s k i l l s t o b e

basically the same. I n f a c t , i n v e r b a l l e a r n i n g , it i s p o s s i b l e .'*

t o show responses on a continuous scale if CCC s y l l a b l e s a r e u s e d

in place of the more common CVC s y l l a b l e s , By m e a s u r i n g t h e

au=b%r of 1ettar-s resea-Cered correctLy, results c a n be brought

into l i n e w i t h those reported i n motor l e a r n i n g (Jnnq, 1972) .

B . Exper imenta l Design And flethods

1 . a l l error measures are not s i g n i f i c a n t l y different for

the directed forgetting p r o a c t i v e - i n t e r f e r e n c e d e s i g n r e l a t i v e to

c o n t r o l s : ha weoer, a l l error aeasures i n c r e a s e r e l a t i v e t o t h e

other twc groups f o ~ ' the no directed f a r g e t t i n g " p a r a d i g m , Such

f i n d i n g s would b e taken a s s u p p o r t fbr t h e i d e a t h a t , within each

age group, c o g n i t i v e c o n t r o l of motor b e h a v i o u r exists i n the

form of d i r e c t e d f o r g e t t i n g , I n a d d i t i o n , an i n c r e a s i n g effect of . =

directed f o r g e t t i n g w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age is hypothesized bs the . . *

result of increased c o g n i t i v e control. - -

ii. S u b j e c t s

The same s u b j e c t s who performed tasks i n Exper iment I uere

t e s t e d i n Experiment 2 after ~ x p e r i m e n t 1 was c o m p l e t e d , a

iii. Apparatus -4' L

The apparatus was t h e sass a s t h a t used i n Exper iment 1 .

iv,Design and A n a l y s i s

Experiment t 2 was desSgned t o i n v e s t i g a t e p r o a c t i v e

i n t e r f e r e n c e . Thirty subjects from each age g r o u p performed under

3 c o e d i t i s n s , t h e o r d e r of which was randoaly a s s i g n e d . The f i r s t - c o n d i t i o n was a c o n t r o l , i n which a movement of l e n g t h 20 cm.

\r

was repeated f o l l o w i n g a 30 s e c o n d nnf i l l e d r e t e n t i o n interval. e

In t h e o t h e r two designs, t h r e e interfering movements o f l e n g t h s

15, 2 5 , and 3 5 cm. were u s e d t o genera te proactive i n t e r f e r e n c e .

I n ths f i r s t of t h e two, snbjects p e r f o r m e d , t h e n r e c a l l e d 30 \

s e c o n d s later each of the 3 i n t e r f e r i n g movements and t h e

c r i t e r i o n movement, The criterion movement was always l a s t i n t h e C

seqnencb; t h e interfe movements were p r e s e n t e d i n random

o r d e r . This d e s i g n nay r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e f o l l o u i n g way:

where n represents a l e a r n i n g t r i a l and B ' a r e ~ r o d n c t i o n

t r i a l , !l4 was t h e 20 cm criterion movemant.

In the second of t h e two interference d e s i g n s , t h e subject

p e r f o r m e d a l l four movements o n e after another, w i t h t h e a

* c r i t e r i o n movea~nt being fourth i n the sequence and t h e

i n t e r f o r i n q mcremohts preceding it i n raohcm order. All four

movements were reproduced i n reverse o r d e r beginning 30 seconds

afte; t h e l e a r n i n g t r i a l of t h e criterion ibrement. The des ign

nay be represented i n t h s f o l l o w i n g way:

- - - - - -- - -- - -

1

Four a t tempts a t each criterion movement r e c a l l ~ e r e given.

The design tested b y s t a t i s t i c a l analysis was a 3dages) x - 3 ( c o n d i t i o n s . of p r o a c t i v e ' i n t e r f e r e n c e ) d e s i g n with ~ e p e a t e d

measures o n the s e c o n d factor.

, I

tr 4

d, w

,

. 4

Id *

#

*r k

U)

Id cf

Pt

mo

cQ

4

m

* a

G

u

: ';'n<

WV

*

-4

UJ o

ma

d)

u -4

0

WH

Q

) (d

c

na

a

OW

0

EU

rl

+

Jv

+

QI 4

mc

la

0

4 at;

kW

d

w

0

Q)

ul u

VI

a

0)

OW

A

-4

F

+.'

w

H

U

W

2

00

M

- C

,,

u

a

vo

u

El o

r(

.rl

0

0

LI ld

r4 -4

&I

Id

U*

U

@V

I

0

a( 04

4M

U

V

W -4

-rl e

a

ma

'

Ua

m

ca -d

84 q,

os

a

ua

+

%when t h e experimenter was s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e subject f u l l y

comprehended what was required, t h e experiment proceeded a s

o u t l i n e d i n t ' h e instructions.

C, Resul t s

Basic descriptive s t a t i s t i c s f o r each o f t h e three

c o n d i t i o n s a t each age group are g iven in T a b l e s 2a ( a b s o l u t e ,

error), 2 b ( c o n s t a n t error), a& 2c { v a r i a b l e error). The main

, effect of t h e proactive interference paradigm was s t a t i s t i c a , l l y

significant for a b s o l u t g error and c o n s t a n t error, hut not f o r

v a r i a b l e e r r o r . I n addition, t h e i n t e r a c t i o n effect betreen the L

paradigms and age was statistically s i g n i f i c a n t for a . b s o l n t e

error and c o n s t a n t e r r o r . but not f o r v a r i a b l e error (Table 2d).

B

m ThBLES 2A,B,CID.

DESCELIPPIVE ST~FISJFECS &ED ~ W ~ L I S X S OF VBRIARCE DATA FOR1 EXPEPIUEBT 2

E a

T a b l e 2a: Descript ive statistics of absolute error (Bxpk 2)

EXPERIBE@TAL KI JDEB C O S D I T I O I -

X SD

CORTBOL

DIB ECTED POBGETTIEG 5 * 3 8 2.29

80 DI R ECT ED PORGETTIIG 7,58 2 ,61

GRADE 3 GRADE 6

T a b l e 2b: D e s c r i p t i v e e a t i s t i c s of constant error (Expt 2)

CBADE 3 . G R A D E 6

10 DIRECTED POBGETTIUG 0.66 8.10 -3,44 '3.11 -3.44 4..28

9 * ' . , , -7 4

able* 2c: Descripkire statistics .of r a r i e l a error ;13tpt 2) . I

f ' ' , - . B

fl EXPE~ILIE'RTAI KII~QEB. GRADE 3 s R A D E 6 -

C O B D I T I O I ' 0 , . - - -

. .X SD X ' S D q 9 c - . .('I[. e , SO' ?, < ~ . . . . c

.. . C " * - ' ' ' ' ~ - - -

DIR ECTED PORGETTIHG

2

RO DI 3 ECT ED

-PORGETTIHG

Table 26: a n a l y s i s of variance, ' - table (Expt 2 )

1

SOU OF MEAM'. SOU RCE SQUARZS . =kp SQU . . AR'E p .

A b s ~ T ~ t e 2. Error

* . ,

. ~o.n"st&nt. Error

LlEal 1277,5 A6 E 14.3 PI DESf6S 0.6 & x DEStE ' 3.97 ERROR 659.0

As c h i l d r e n age, t h e i r a b i l i t y t o d i s r e g a r d t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t

i n f o r m a t i o n i n c r e a s e s (Ragen, 1367; D r u k e r and Hagen, 1969) . The

three p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e designs essentially r e g r e s e n t t h r e e

i n f o r m a t i o n . ~ h & control c o n d i t i o n r e p r e s e n t s a sit n a t i o n in

w h i c h c n l y r e l e v a n t i n f c r m a t i o n is p s e s e n t , in p a r t i c u l a r , t h e L

s p e c i f i c movement b e i n g tested. The d i r e c t e d f o r q e t t i n g p a r a d i g n , 0

on t h e other hand , represents a s i t u a t i o n i'n which the s p e c i f i c

task-relevant f n f o r n a t i o n is p r s c e d e d by i r r e l e v a n t i n f o r n a t i o n

i n t h e form o f three i n t e r f e r i n g movemsnt r , The s u b j e c t i s % I

p r o v i d e d with the o p p o r t u n i t y t o i g n o r e that i n f c G m a t i o n by t h e

process of d i r e c t e d forgetting, h o & r e r , I n t h e no di~ectcd Z

-. f o r q e t t i n g paradigm, t h e specific p e r f c r m a n c e task is a g a i n

1 p r e c e d e d b y o t h e r i n f o r r a t i o n . I n t h i s case, all the i n f o r m a t i e h $ -'

\

i s p e r c e i v e d by t h e subject as b e i n g r e l e v a n t and nct subject t o

directed f o r g e t t i n g , Performance on t h e d i r e c t e d f o r g e t t i n g t a s k

relative t o t h e c o n t r o l i s thus a tes; of the subject*^ a b l i t y t o

disregard t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t inforaation, Per formance i n t h e no

d i r e c t e d f o g g e t t i n g p a g a d i g ~ -relatee t o t h e - - c o n t r c l -- i s \ i n d i c a t i v e of t h e central ptocessing c a p a c i t y of the s u b j e c t ,

lover r e p r o d o c t i o n enots i s l p l y i n q a g r e a t e r a b i l i t y to r e t a i n @ '

B

Om

y

cn .c,

0)

D

A

a,. lc,

Tl

C)

m

d

F I G U R E 8: THE EFFECT OF PROACTIVE IITEBPEREBCE ON ERROR REASURES

8 A : ABSOLUTE ERROR VS,. PI D E S I G I 8B: CQISTMT BflRQR LVS, PI D B S I G I

Figure - 8a

Kindergar ten Grade 3

A Grade W7

-Control Dkected Fkw@tw No Directed ~orgettik

Experimental Condition

Kindergar ten Grade 3

A Grade ,@'

Control Directed Forgbtting Mo 1 % Directed Forgetting

Experimental m i t i o n

w h i c h are undershot w h i l k ' t h e multiple t r i a l s design produces a n %

even greater u n d e r s h o o t i n g of t h e criterion, The ycungest

subjects depar t from the pattern on t h e t w o o l d e r group*, i n L t h a t

. movements made i n t h e m u l t i p l e trials d e s i g n were o v e r s h o t L.

r e l a t i v e t o b o t h the c o n t r o l and t h e c r i t e r i o n itself. These

r e s p o n s e s a r e u n e x p e c t e d since two of t h e t h r e e i n t e r f e r i n g w moveasnts were l o n g e r t h a n - t h e c r i t e r i o n a n d m i g h t ~ e a s o n a b l p be

. *L

, e x p e c t e d t o . . e l i c i t an adapta t ion r e s p o n s e i n the d i r e c t i o n of t h e ,

overall i n t e r f e r e n c e , Such a ' rssponse would produce p o s i t i v e , b 6

n o t n e g a t i v e , c o n s t a n t e r r o r . It ~ o u l d b e speculated t h a t

subjects r e s p o n d e d t o r e l a t i v e l y l o n g i n t e r f e r i n g movements b y C

a v e r c o m p e n s a t i n g and, therefore, u n d e r s h o o t i n g , T h i s suggestion

gives subjects c r e d i t for a h i g h e r degree cf c o g n i t i v e control of.

motor b e h a v i o u r t h a n the a b s o l H e error data on directed

forgetting i n d i c a t e . however , A t t h e p r e s e n t time, t h i s f i n d i n g a

is i n e x p l i c a b l e g i v e n present t h e o r i e s of adaptat icn level

r e s p o n s e s (IIelson, 1 9 6 4 ) ,

L"..

No statistically s i g n i f i c a n t effect of t h e proactive

i n t e r f e r e n c e ~ a r a d i g a s on v a r i a b l e error w%s d e m o n s t r a t e d L

although the age effect, as p r e v i o u s l y d i b c u s s e d , was

s i g n i f i cae t , O l d e r c h i l d r e n shoved c o n s i s t e n t l y less v a r i a b l e

e r r o r i n a l l c o n d i t i o n s t han y o u n g e r ones, The p a r a d i g m s by a g e

i n t e r a c t i o n effect u a s n o t significant s h o u i n g t h a t p r o a c t i v e

i n t e r f e r e n c e affects c h i l d r e n i n t h e same way a% all a g e s tested, G

B

4 CHAPTER 4

- ~ - . .. . -

z+: . . J

\ - Experiment 3 %&' *~ -. . . -: -

\ - A. I n t r o d u c t i o n ..

C

Jenkins a n d , D a l l e n b a c h ~ ( 1 9 2 4 ) found that s u b j e c t s showed I

d i f f e r e n t . a m o u n t s of r e t e n t i o n of v e r b a l ~ a t e r i a l f o l l o r i n g sleep a

\ '

t h a n f o l l o ' w i n g r a k i n g activity. S u b j e c t s d i g p l a y e d decreases in

r e t e n t i o g d u r i n 2 the f i r s t two h o u r s a f t e r l e a r n i n g anber -both

c o n d i i i o n s f bough the sleeping s u b j e c t s showed marginally less .

f a rge t ting , w.rver, b e t w e e n two a n d e i g h t h o u r s p o s t learning + r

t h e raking u h l i k e tbe s l e e p i n g g r o u p , c o n t i n u e d t h e l o s s

*f material evanYthougb th8 a c t i v i t i e s i n which t h e y sere

: i n v o l v e d were u n r e l a t e d t o t h e test nonsense s y l l a b l e s . T h e s e '

4. ' ,

r e s u l t s l *d t q t h e s u & e s t i o n t h a t general a c t i v i t y s p e e d s t h e - f

l o s s of n e w l y acquired skills. T h i s i n t e r f e r e n c e c o n c e p t , aaong

F o t h e r s , uas a b r e a k w i t h tra t i o n a l thought which h e l d ,

\ ,

f o r g e t t i n g t o be a f u n c t i o n of the decay o f t h e B e a o r y t r a c e ( -

a c q u i r e d d u r i n g l e a r n i n g . I t was i n c l u d e d in a summary of t h e .

basic p r i n c i p l e s of r e t r p a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e (oi r e a c t i v e ,

\ B

inhibition in R u l l i a n terms) p u b l i s h e d by HcGeoch a n d Iricn

f

Among t h e f a c t o r s t h o u g h t t o a f f ec t the i n t e r f e r i n g

q u a l i t i e s of i n t e r p o l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s were:

-

.o

1. The degree of s i n i l a r i t y b e t w e e n original a n d

i n t e r p o l a t e d activities a s e l a b o r a t e d i n t h e Skaggs -Rob inson

h y p o t h e s i s ( R o b i n s o n , 1927) and t h e Osgood t r a n s f e r s u r f ace a n d

its m o d i f i c a t i o n s (Osgood, 1946; l a r t i n , 1965). I n t e r g o l a t e d

t a s k s of s l i g h t s i m i l a r i t y t o t h e o r i g i n a l h a v e the g r e a t e s t

- i n t e r f e r i n g effect .

\ 2. The level of , o r i g i n a l learning, t h a d is, i n t e r f e r i n g

t

. effects are r e d u c e d under c o n d i t i o n s of high o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g *

', ( K r e n g e r , 1929) .

i

3 . The amoudt of i a t e r p o & a t e d m a t e r i a l a n d t h e degree' t o

which it is l e a r n e d , t h a t is, t h e g r e a t e r the a m o u n t and l e a r n i n g

of i n t e r p o l a t e d m a t e r i a l , t h e greater t h e l o s s of o z i g i n a l 1

mater ia l (Underwood, 1954) . 8

,

\ Even before Adaas and D i j k s t r a (1966) B u g g e s t e d t h a t more

a t t e n t i o n be p a i a t o the results of i n t e r f e r e n c e o n motor < s k i l l s

r e t e n t i o n , 6

a n d had d o n e exac tl'g t h a t .

- Their subjects were p r e - t r a i n e d by, guidance i n a l e v e r i3

' p o s i t i o n i n g task and t h e n instructed t o nova u n g u i d e d t o t6e test

target. During a 28 secend retention i n t e z v a l , one of t u o '-/ i s t e ~ p o f a t e d tas& was introduced: s u b j e c t s either re-hroed t h e

lever or picked a pencil up from t h e f l o o r . R e - z e r o i n g i n d u c e d

n o r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e while, picking u p t h e pencil d i d h a v e \

a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r f e r i n g effect. A d d i t i o n a l d e a % n s t r a t i o n s of B

' retroactive i n t e r f e r e n c e i n m o t o r t a s k s h a v e been r e p c r t e d b y -. I ~ e r i a n and B a i l e y (1970) and P e p p e r and Herman ( 1 970). Taken. I. . _

t o g e t h e r , 'their r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t , f o r force r e s p o n s e s , h

retroacti~v~~interference is an import n t c a u s e of f o r g e t t i n g : i n Y f a c t , t h e l a t t e r p a p e r f a i l e d t o p r o d d m any e v i d e n c e f o r t h e . trace d e c a y h y p o t h e s i s f u r recal l i n t e r v a l s b e t w e e n 4 a n d 60

1

s e c o n d s t h o u g h t h e a u t h o r s d o e x p r e s s t h e i r s u p p o r t f o r a d u a l t

p r o c e s s t h e o r y of f o r g e t t i n g i n motor s h o r t term memory.

I n t e r p o l a t e d force r e s p o n s e s g r e a t e r t h a n t h e c r i t e r i o n were, r

' u n i f c r n l p s u c c e s s f u l i n p r o d u c i n g ' r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e , w h i l e f- '7

i n t e r p o l a t e d forces less than t h e c r i t e r i o n g e n e r a t e d less

i n t e r f e r e n c e , T h e d i r e c t i o n of the i n d u c e d e r r o x increase was i n

the d i r e c t i o n of t h e i n t e r p o l a t e d movement, s u p p o r t i n g a n - b

P

. a d a p t a t i o n l e v e l response a s d i s c u s s e d b y H e l s o n ( 1 964) and

~ i c k i 6 s o n 11 976) . d

29,- 1

- "& " ' R e c e n t s t u d i e s of i n t e r f e r e n c e h a v e c o n c e n t r a t e d n o t si~ply

on o b s e r v i n q the effect of i n t e r f e r i n g movements on t h e = 7

r e p r o d u c t i o n of a criterion b u t rather h a v e a t t e m p t e d t o u s e

interference as a t o o l t o g a i n - i n s i g h t i n t o the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

of the codes which subserve movement i n f o r m a t i o n . Kerr (1973) 8

p r o p o s e d that i n t e r f e r e n c e is of- two k i n d s . C a p a c i t y interference 4

o c c u r s when t a s k s demand more o f t h e l i m i t e d c e n t r a l p r o c e s s i n g

-. c a p a c i t y than i s a v a i l a b l e ; structural i n t e r f e r e n c e o c c u r s ~ h & n <

-

t a s k s compete for t h e s.aa.0 p s r c e p t i v e and merorg p r o c e s s e s . Both

~ i e w e r t 6 1 976) a'nd Laabs (1974) hare reported t h a t d i f f e r e p t

k i n d s f movement i n f o r m a t i o n ( f o r example, direc t i cn v s .

a m p l i t u d e or d i s t a n c e v s . l o c a t i o n ) a r e i n t e r f e r e d w i t h \

' d i f f e r e n t l y . Bt t h e p r e s e n t t i a e , however, s u c h studies a r e . p r e l i m i n a r y " and little i s Known o f the ways i n which lsoveaent

i n f o r m a t i o n , i s ccded ,

B, Experimental Design and Methods

a

i . H y p o t h e s e s

3

1.. n l l error measures i n c r e a s e i n subjects p e r f c r m i n 9 under

c o n d i t i o n s o f r e t r o a c t i v e j n t e r f e r e n c e relative to c a n t r o l +

s u b j e c t s . Sych a f i n d i n g ~ o u l d b e .taken a s s u p p o r t f o r a role of

retroactive l a t e r f s q e n c s i n s h o r t term motor f o r g e t t i n g .

2 . A 1 1 e r r o r measures a r e less under b o t h c o n d i t i o n s of

i n t e r f e r e n c e and c o n t r o l w.hen a h i g h e r l e v e l of o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g

i s q i v e n . Such a f i n d i n g would be taken a s support for t h e

r e s i s t a n c e t o r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e afforded ,by increased

original l e a r n i n g . '$"

V1- 0

) *r

U

a

cu a3

3

a, Y

V1

+,

w (d

m PC

rl

rl 4

(d

(d

d

U

a

0,

H

w +J

M

s

su

O

ld

P4

a

m a

I

.+

'a

V1"

U

4

Ct

Wd

d

0

W.

.@

d

(d

09

.r

(w

at

da

u

0

'P

Cr a?

A

.A

0.

.

1 ,.,+

-4

w

*,

a

Q

u

" -2 a

au

Ll

.4

O

EI

UU

OW

r

)W

.r

lO

0

3

'u

lrt O

IW

w

oa

-

AW

UO

0

.r

(U

wU

)u

g,

.rf u

0,

u+

'm

ao

w

cd

ca

la

l-

4

w.

rl

a+

,+

,a

.

d

V)

.A

E

w

@a

&

r,

oS

;+

,u

ctj

o

o

n

(J

ti

lU

aU

o

.rl .d

.e

) tT1 -

rn

V)

U.

~U

)

..

A

k

0

U)

a, U

T-

4U

O)

Wk

w

la

a

3

u U

) .

Id

jb

$

A

'* 4

t3 pl

(d

m

d

i ~

UU

-

a

o

rf

a

u'.m

w

0Q

)o

U

a

mc

cw

an

l

aT

f6

,u

0,

~d

+.

'W

(d

OL

II

(

PC

(W

VI

a'

W

VQ

,

4

h

uw

va

(d

0

a

cf .a

-4

*I

F(

0

m*

r

as

-'

u a

+

.PI

ma

\?

*

'u

2 @

-

A

U1 V)

u

va

a'

*t

P

8 "I

Ja

O+

Q

)-

+'

@U

)

a*

.'

vl

w

(U

U

0

, u

W a

do

tr

ow

W

tP

d

A

w*

rf

-U

Jm

m

(U

V]

r*

)a

'C

Ia

'44

a' tJ

4 -4

kr

Cl

(d

I cl

Q,

ah

&

*a

)t

nr

n~

dt

d

fl

En

fW

Q)

@

dw

sa

dd

a

4

Wt'

0

* a

.O

U

*ri I

oa

a

sa

d,

~

UC

I

The i n s t r u c t i o n s specific t o Experiment 1 rere r e p e a t e d t o

t h e s u b j e c t s a t this time. he' only change was thag tbosa

subjects who were to be g i v e n ten original l e a r n i n g trial's were

t o l d that $hey would r e c e i v e t e n , not one, l e a r n i n g t r i a l s .

s perf arming the r e t r o a c t i v e interference parq.digm -_ r e q u i r e d t h e s e a d d i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n s :

-\ A f t & goo hare done y o u r learning t r i a l t s ) , there r i l l hC h

wait ing p e r i o d beiore I a s k you to repeat your .learned movement.

During t h a t time I w i l l ask ybu t o make three d i f f e r e n t

movements to the stop. one right, after a n o t h e r . Phen you have B

done these three. I w i l l ask you to r e p e a t t h e movement you 0

.-.I ' l e a r n e d befote t h e waiting p e r i o d . " i

When t h e experimenter was s a t i s f i e d t h a t the subject f u l l y \

comprehended what was required, t h e expeAaent p r o c e e d e d a s

o u t l i n e d i n t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s .

B 1

C; R e s u l t s

B a s i c descriptive statistics for t h e c o n t r o l and t h s Q

i n t e r f e r e n c e ccmditians a t each age groiip a tg 9Tven 35 ~ a b l < 3a.

Basic &escriMire st&istics for t$e conditions of b i g 3 and law

o r i g i n a l igarning are a l s o g i v e n in Table 3a. The main effect of

P ' .a.

-.

-

, retroactive interference w a ~ ~ s t a t i s t i c a l l y \ -

a b s o l u t e error; bat not for constant er ror

- - - -- - -

s i g n i f i c a n t for * . . f - L L - -

.or variable exror

(Table 3b). . *. The ,interaction ei-fect of retroactitv-e interference

and age was not statistically s i g n i f i c a + n t for any of t h e three P

dependent r r o q measures (Table 3b). For both control and

. interference ' the -effect b f c r i g i n a l learning was ' . * 'i

statistically significant for a l l o f t h e dependent err& meaqores d -

( T a b l e 3c) .

TABLES 3 A , B , C , D a

FOB EXPEBIMEET 3-.

Table 3a: mcriptire S t a U sties Of Retx,pa~t~* Xa tcerfhramze ~ x p e r i m e n t (Expt . 3)

( *

KIIDERGABTEB G R A D E 3 G R A D E 6/7

I I T E R - PEREBCE

Table ib: Dsscript ire Stat ist ics Experiment (Expt 3 )

I BIGH O B f 6 I U A L L E A B I I I G

, SD

For O r i g i n a l Learning ,

LOR O B I G I I A L LEARUIIG, *

T a b l e 3c: . ,

SOURCE '

A b s o l u t e Error

C o n s t a n t Error

HEAH AG E RI DESIGR A x DES9N ERROR

Yar iable Error

3EAN AG E RI D E S I G N A x DES91 EB R OR

A n a l y s i s of Variance Table F o f Retroactf ve ~ i p e r i a e n t (~xpt.

sun OF ~ E A B SQUARES DP SQUARE PW

Interference

Table 3d: Ana lys i s of variance Table For Original earning Experiment (Expt. 3)

S-tlH OF MEAN SOURCE - SQUARES DF S Q U A R E F P

CONTROL

CE REAH 140. 1 1 140.1 5.07 0.03 E R R O R 2406.0 88 27.7

Y E EIEAN 117.2 1 117.2 95.80 <O.O1 E R R O R ' 106.4 88 1 . 2 ~

IHTER- )

FEREHCE

AE H E A N . 4164.5 1 4165.5 1.04 0.38 ERROR 8516.9 88 96.8

CE H E A N %

680 . 4 . 140.1 5 * 1 0 0.03 ERROR 11739.3 88 133.4

a

V E n E a l 184.5 . I i8rr.s 58.8 <O.OI ERROR 276.0 88 3 . 1 .

* D, Discussion

_ - The ability to produce decrements i n recall of learned

mater ia l b y introducing int%rpolated a c t i v i t y i n t o t h e r e t e n t i o n

i n t e r v a l has a long h i s t o r y i n both t h e verbal and motor domains.

Given that children do n o t a t tend t o s h o r t term memory tasks as

well as a d u l t s (Sroufe, 1971) , children would be expected to

r e a d i l y denonstrate retroactive interference effects, The

a b s o l u t e error data show t h a t , collapsed o v e r a l l ages , t h i s is

the c a s e . Orilp the grade 3 subjects show no s t a t i s t i c a l l y %

,3+

s i g n i f i c a n t different effect of t h e retroactive i n t e r f e r e n c e

paradigm, possibly due to the extremely large variance about the

mean d e a o n s t r a t e d b y the grade 3 s u b j e c t s during t h e . i n t e r f e r e n c e

task. The results, t a k e n w i t h the previously r e p o r t e d trace decay

r e s u l t s , offer support for a d u a l process f o r g e t t i n g mechanism i n t

t h e age groups t e s t e d i n t h e Rotor domain. w h i l e the i n t e r a c t i o n

effect between interference and age was gnat significant, t h u s

s e t t i n g it apart from t h e trace decay d a t a , s i m i l a r -results {that

is, younger children showing greater trace decay t h a n older &es

a s the r e t e n t i o n interval l e n g t h e n e d ) might have been obtained i f

d i f f eren t lewels of retroactive interference had been .produced by

different amounts of i n t e r p o l a t e d a c t i v i t y , Younger c h i l d r e n ,

with less " c e n t r a l processing c a p a c i t y , would d e a o n s % r a t e - 5

increasingly greater i n t e r f e r e n c e e f fects a s t h e r e t e n t i o n

interval is i n c r e a s i n g l y filled. -

The data for c o n s t a n t and variable errors show-no

s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t effect of retroactive interference.

He vertheless, whi l e t h e results arb n o t statistically signif f c a n t , the aeans for constant error show t h e s a n e unexpected a d a p t a t i o n

l e v e l response for two of the age groups as was described for t h e

proactive interference d a t a , The interpolated a c t i v i t y , thqngh

g e n e r a l l y of greater magnitude than the criterion moveaent,

produced reproduct ion efforts which uere markedly undershot

relative to controls, A s stated - b e f o r e , there i s n o readily

available explanation for t h i s phenomenon, \ ' ;

ii. Original L e a r n i n g d

Adaas and D i j k s t r a (1966) t e s t e d , w i t h a d u l t s , t h 6

h y p o t h e s i s t h a t a more firmly e s t a b l i s h e d memory trace i s more \

, r e s i s t a n t t o t h e i n t e r f e r i n g effects of i n t e r p o l a t e d activity I

t h a n a less well established one . S u b j e c t s were p r o v i d e d w i t h

e i t h e r small, medium, o r large amoun t of o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g p r i o r

to the f i l l e d r z t a n t i o n i n t e r v a l . S u b j e c t s who had had t h e most '

l e a r n i n g t r i a l s were l ess affected by r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e .

T h e d a t a i n this s t u d y indicates t h a t the same effect ,

a p p a r e n t l y does n o t occnr. w i t h c h i l d r e n . For c o n t r o l q r o u p s , t h a t

is, no i n t e r p o l a t e d a c t i v i t y , t h e g r o u p h a v i n g more o r i g i n a l

Learning t r i a l s had a r e d u c t i o n i n a b s o l u t e . e r r o r upon \

r e p r o d u c t i o n of t h e c r i t e r i o n . The i n t e r f e r e n c e g r o u p , o n t h e

other hand, showed exactly t h e . o p p o s i t e e f f e c t t o t p s c o n t r o l s t

a n d t o t h e expected r e s u l t . T h e s e s u b j e c t s who had s u p p o s e d l y

l e a r n e d the task t o q $ i g h e r d e g r e e wers a c t u a l l y laore << -

s u s c e p t i b l e t o the effects of r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e a s

i n d i c a t e d by t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n t l y increased a b s o l u t e e r r o r . I n

a d d i t i o n , i n c r e a s e d o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g h a d l i t t le effect be tween B t -

c o n t r o l and i n t e r f e r s n c e g r o u p s a s shown by the means in T a b l e

3a. For constant error, the o v e f a f l effect of increased or ig ina l

l e a r n i n g . was t o s h i f t r e p r o d u c t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n e x p l i c a b l y i n t h e

. ,

negat*ive d i r e c t i o n . O n l y f o r v a r i a b l e error was a p r e d i c t a b l e

effect of i n c r e a s s d o r i g i n a l learning seen. Subjects i n both

c o n t r o l a n d i n t e r f e r e n c e g r o u p s s h o w e d a decrease i n v a r i a b l e

p r ro r when more l s a r n i n g t r i a l s were g i v e n . T h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t

t h e i n c r e a s e d l e a r n i n g d i d generate a more well e s t a b l i s h e d

memory trace. ~ e v e = t h e l e s s , i n t K e face of i n t s r p o l a t e d ' . a c t i v i t y ,

, o n l y t h e c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e memory trace remained s i n c e what t h e

s u b j e c t s remembered a s being t h e c r i t e r i o n 'was n o t i t a t a l l ,

hence the i n t e r f e r e n c e e f f e c t . P

1 "

d

. Original l e a r n i n g a p p e a r s t o h a v e a n unusual a n d =-.

u n p r e d i c t a b l e e f fec t on children l n t h e contex t of t h e s h o r t term 3

memory paradigm. T h e c a u s e of t h e s e r e s u l t s i s n o t u n d e r s t o o d a t

this time. It i s possible t h a t , by i m b e d d i n g the experiment on

oriqinal learning w i t h i n a l a r g e number of o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t a l

demands upon t h e subject, t h e effect, of p r o a c t i v e interference

inherent i n t h e design confounded the original l e a r n i n g results

p r o d u c i n g t h e u n e x p e c t e d f i n d i n g s . T h e difference between o n e and \<

t e n original l e a r n i n g t r i a l s may well h a v e been t r i v i a l by t h e

t ime Experiment 3 was p e r f o r m e d .

CHAPTER 5

General is cuss ion #

T h e r e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d i n this s t u d y have i m p l i c a t 5 o n s i n

b o t h t e a c h i n g of motor and motor l e a r n i n g and p e r f o r m a n c e t h e o r y .

For t h e l a t t e r , t h e p o i n t s t o be made s t a n d o n f i rm g r o u n d s i n c e ,

generally s p e a k i n g , t h e o r e t i c a l a p p r o a c h e s t o m o t o r l e a r n i n g h a v e

been f o r m u l a t e d from t h e simple k i n d s of novetuents such a s t h o s e

usedahere. For the former o n t h e other hand, care s u s t be taken

n o t t b g e n e r a l i z e ' t o aoveaent classes f a r removed from t h e

e x p e r i m e n t a l ones, C o m p l i c a t e d p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n s k i l l s a r e

very d i f f e r e n t froa l i n e a r p o s i t i o n i n g a n d g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s s h o u l d

be made only with c a u t i o n . S t i l l , the i i n d i n g s h e r e can be , u s e d .

a s g u i d e l i n e s f o r i n s t r u c t i n g c h i l d r e n i n motor skills p r o v i d e d

that t h e y are recognized a s h a v i n g come froa s i m p l e s k i l l s a n d ,

may require m o d i f i c a t i o n i n order t o b e a p p l i e d i n t h e

"class room" s e t t i n g .

1

C o n s i d e r i n g first ths f i n d i n g s of E x p e r i m e n t 1, s e v e r a l

p o i n t s of i n t e r e s t a r i s e . T h e trace decay cf motcr i a f o r r a t i ' o n

. s e e n with c h i l d r e n d u p l i c a t e s that s e e n i n o t h e r s h o r t term

memory work in both the v e r b a l and motor domains w i t h a d u l t s , For

r e t e n t $on i n t e r v a l l e n g t h effects, c h i l d r e n c o n f ~ r a t o

theore t ica l , e x p e c t a t i o n s ;nd d o n o t r e q u i r e s p e c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n

w i t h i n the t h e o r e t i c a l framework. Prom a p r a c t i c a l s t a n d p o i n t , i t

is , w o r t h w h i l e n c t i n g t h a t younger c h i l d r e n a r e less s u c c e s s f u l a t

r e t a i n i n g p r o p r i o c e p t i v s i n f o r m a t i o n i n s h o r t term memory a n d

p r e s u m a b l y a t t r a n s f a r r i n g i t t o lonq term memory. T h i s s u g g e s t s *

t h a t i n a s i t u a t i o n i n which g u i d a n c e i s b e i n g p r o v i d e d d u r i n g

s k i l l l e a r n i n g (a s i t u a t i o n a n a l o g o u s t o the c o n s t r a i e e d learning

t r i a l s ) , c h i l d r e n , p a r t i c u l a r l y young ones, s h o u l d he

a attempt t o repeat t h e movement o n the i i : own a s quickly a s

p o s s i b l e a f t e r t h e g u i d e d learning t r i a l . I n this way, the

r e p r o d u c t i o n t r i a l will a p p r o x i m a t e the l e a r n i n g trial a s c l o s e l y

a s p o s s i b l e . I f a l l learning a n d r e p r o d u c t i o n t r i a l c o m b i n a t i o n s

are p e r f o r m e d i n this manner , a model of the s k i l l - a p e r c e p t u a l

t r a c e - (Adams,. 1971) w i l l be acquired with a minimnn of v a r i a n c e

o r noise a s s o c i a t e d w i t h it. Such a trace s t o r e d i n long term*

memory could c o n c e i v a b l y facilitate future p e r f o r m a n e e of that.

p a r t i c u l a r s k i l l d u e t o t h e s m a l l amoun t of u n q e r t a i n t y

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h it.

Uhen d i s c u s s i n g t r a c e d e c a y r e s u l t s f r o 8 E x p e r i m e n t 1, it is

worth n o t i n g t h a t a n i n c o n s i s t e n c y arises when the f i n d i n g s are \

compared with c o n t r o l findings i n E x p e r i m e n t 2. Por all age .groups,L

ths 30 second u n f i l l e d retention interval i n Experiment ? s h o u l d

ma tch w i t h t h e 30 s e c o n d u n f i l l e d r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l i n E x p e r i m e n t

2. They d o n o t match, however. There i s c o n s i d e r a b l y nore memory

- l o s s under c o n d i t i o n s i n E x p e r i m e n t 1 than i n E x p e r i m e n t 2. The

1

d i f f e r e n c e Bay be e ' x p l a i n e d ' b y t h e f a c t t h a t , i n Experiment- i

'*

1, sob j p c t s pe'rforaed i n a s i t u a t i o n of a c c u m n l a t i n g p r o a c t i v e

i n t e r f e r e - n c e , T h e r e f o r e , the d a t a 9 n E x p e r i m e n t 1 can a t bsst be

o n l y s u g g e s t i v e of tracs d e c a y ; T h e r e s u l t s may be s q u a l l y vell

e x p l a i n e d by t h e a l t e r n a t i v e ~ ~ e c h a n i s d o f p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e .

Despite t h e c o n t r o v e r s y a b o u t +he r e l a t i v e u s e f u l n e s s of -

d i s t a n c e a n d l o c a t i o n information, e v i d e n c e here shows two p o i n t s

c l e a r l y . First, c h i l d r e n use l o c a t i o n - i n f o r m a t i o n a s t h s i r

primary p r o p r i o c e p t i v e i n p u t , a r e s u l t in keeping with what is

known a b o u t a d u l t s . This i s not t o say that d i s t a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n

is not of value. S u b j e c t s a t a l l ages benefitted s l i g h t 1 y f ro@

t h e presence o'f t h e extra d i s t a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n , suggesting that, 2

whenever p o s s i b l e , it is "useful t o a d v i s e c h i l d r e n t o attend * t o -, ,

a l l a v a i l q b l e movement c u e s .and, i f necessary, t o h a l p them

develop s t r a t e g i e s by which t h e y m i g h t better u s e them.

'I C h i l d r e n i n t h i s study, when inf o f m a l l y q u e s t i o n e d a b l u t

t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e s t r a t e g i e s , i m p l i e d t h a t t h e y were unaware of

u s i n g distance i n f o r m a t i o n i n a n y way. Yet the d a t a show t h a t ,

a l t h o u g h unaware of i t , t h e y were, Also, c h i l d r e n s t a t e d t h a t

l o n g e r movements were easier t o remember t h a n s h o r t o n e s although

the d a t a show t h e opposite t o be true, These r e s u l 4 s , t a k e n

together, indicate t h a t children's p e r c e p t i o n s are n o t t h e b e s t

s a u r c s of i n f o r m a t i o n regarding t h e i r progress a t a given motor

task.

\ ' D e l v i n g i n t o t -he effect of movement l e n g t h , t h e d a t a i n this. l

s t u d y s h o w s w i t h i n a b e h a v i o u r a l . f r a m e w o r k what h a s been r e c e n t l y

demonstrated b y a t l e a s t some a u t h o r s i n n e u r o p h ~ s i o l a g i c a l

s t u d i e s , T h e r e is e v i d e n c e ( a i l l a x , 1975; Tracey . 1979) t h a t , ,

d u r i n g ext-enscr m o ~ e m s n t s , j o i n t r e c e p t o r s p r o v i d i n g l o c a t i o n

i n f o r m a t i o n f i r e d i f f e r e n t i a l l y a t d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i e n s . Bs

e x t e n s i o n c o n t i n u e s , t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e l i m b i s leas r e l i a b l y

a o n i t d r e d i n the j o i n t s r e s u l t i n g ( f r o a a b e h a v i c u r a l standpoint)

i n the s u b j e c t h a v i n g less r e l i a b l e locat ioa information for

~ o v e m e n t s r e q u i r i n g g r e a t e r e x t e n s i o n t h a n for n o v e a e n t s

r e q u i r i n q lesser e x t e n s i o n , Whi le t h e a b s o l u t e -error d a t a f o r

movement length bear t h i s o u t i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s t u d y ( b o t h for

a b s o l u t e and percent v a l u e s , t h a t is, error e x p e e s s e d as a

of t h e t o t a l l e n g t h ) , the p r o p o s i t i o n i s still t e n t a t i v e .

T h e arm p o s i t i o n i n g task c o n d u c t e d o n s u b j e c t s here is p r i m a r i l y

a s h o u l d e r a n d elbow t a s k a n d t h e r e c e p t o r i n f o r a a t i c h $ o n e s from

studies of the knee, wrist, and e lbow. T h e t r a n s f e r a b i l - & k y of

cbarac teristics of receptors f SOP one j o i n t t o ' a n o t h e r is

u n c e r t a i n (P. Bawa, p e r s o n a l commnnica t i o n ) a n d t h e knowledge i n

t h i s aspect of motor c o n t r o l awaits a combined

behavionral /neurophys io log ica l study,

Children are easily a f f e c t e d by p r o a c t i v e interference and 1

younger ones have poorly developed cognitive skills like directed

forgetting. To minimize tbese effects, the goa l of t e a c h i n g a

progressive series of skills should be fully e x p l a i n e d so that

the c h i l d fully coaprehends t h a t a l l the s k i l l s are related and

that t h e easy onas st the hegixubq of the sezies axe

t a s k - r e l e v a n t .

With ,reference to r e t r o a c t i v e interference, i t i s c l ear t h a t

c h i l d r e n are dranatically a f f e c t e d b y i n t e r p o l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s .

his c a n be minimized in the practical setting by r e d u c i n g a s

much a s possible the length of the retention i n t e r v a l so a s to

+redgee the o p p o r t m i t g f o ~ i n t e r f e r e n c e t o ocdur. Shile this

makes bath theoretical and practical s e n s e , the data -on level o f '

o r i g i n a l l e a r n i n g p r o d n c e d i n t h i s study c r e a t e s t h e antenable

pedagogical position of h a v i n g to a d v i s e a g a i n s t practice for

fear o f having p e r f o r a a n c e d e g e n e r a t e a l t o g e t h s r , These r e s u l t s

aay be b e s t i n t e r p r e t e d i n t h e c o n t e x t of p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e

c o n f o u n d i n g t h i s part of Exper iment 3,

/-

. The basic prenises of motor skills r e s e a r c h developed with - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - --- - - - --

adults have been related to child growth and d e v e l o p m e n t . - - - - - - - -- - -- -- - - -- - -

Children adhere closely to the performance characteristics of

adults s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e laws of n o t o r behar iour are

A - parsimonious o v e r t h e three age levels, e x t e n d i n g probably t o

a d u l t h o o d . D i f f e r e n c e s do occur between age g r o u p s i n t h o s e tasks

which require a high degree of cognitive c o n t r o l bver motor

behavioor indicating t h a t some motor p e r f c r a a n c e s may require

more c o g n i t i v e ability than v e r y young c h i l d r e n p o s k e s s .

#everth,eless , t h e bas i c p r i n c i p l e s cf motor learning and

performance hold t r u e for children a s they do for adults.

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Adams, 3 . A . " A closed l o theory of motor l e a r n i n g . " J. Hotox B e h a v i o r 3 (2) : 1 1 1-150. 1

Adalirs, J . A . and S, D i j k s t r a , ti S h o r t term memory f o r motor r e s p o n s e s m n J. Expt . Psgcb . 71: 314-318. 1966.

Al ton , U.U. and J, weil. "Young c h i l d r e n ' s use of t e m p o r a l and s p a t i a l order i n f o r m a t i o n i n s h o r t term memory.n J , Expt . ChildoPsych. 2 4 ~ 1 4 7 - 1 6 3 . 1977.

Anooshian , L.J. and K.L. Witson, " D i s t a n c e d i s t o r t i o n s i n memory f a r s p a t i a l 1 o c a t i o n s . n C h i l d Dev, 48: 1704-1707, 1977.

Ascoli, K. 11, and R. A, Schmid t . " P r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n s h o r t tera memorpmW J, Mot, Behav. 1 ~ 2 9 - 3 6 . 1969.

Babich, F.R., A.L. Jacobson, a n d S, Bubash. t r C r o s s - s p e c i e s t r a n s f e r of l e a r n i n g : effect of R N A f rom h a m s t e r s on r a t behav iour ." PrOC. Bat. Acad. S c i , 54: 1299- 1302. 1965.

B o s v e l l , J . and E,A. Bi lodeau . "Short term r e t e n t i o n o f a simple motor t a s k a s a f u n c t i o n of i n t e r p c l a t e d a c t i v i t y . " P e r c , and notor S k i l l s 18: 227-230, 1964.

own, J . B . *Some tes ts o f d e c a y theory of i m m e d i a t e memorymH E x p t . Psych. 10: 12-21. 1958,

Brown, B.B. "An e x a m i n a t i o n of v i s u a l and v e r b a l c o d i n g p r o c e s s e s i n preshcool c h i 1 d r e n m 8 * C h i l d Dev, 48: 38-45. 1977.

Bruner, J . . n ~ r g a n i z a t i o n of e a r l y s k i l l e d a c t i o n s n Child Development 44: 1-11, 1973.

Burwitz, L, f lProact ive i n t e r f e r e n c e and directed forgetting i n short term memory . n J, Expt. Psych* 102: 799-805. 1974.

C h o r o v e r , S. L. and P . B . S c h i l l e r . I t shor t - t e rm re t f o g r a d e amnes ia i n r a t s e t * J. Comp. P h y s i o l . Psych , - 5 9 ~ 7 3 - 7 8 . 1965.

Cohen, R.L. a n d I, Sandburg. sa elation between i n t e l l i g e n c e and s h o r t term aemory. * ' Cog. T s y c h , 9: 5349554. 1977.

Conrad , R e nThe c h r o n o l o g y of t h e d e v e l o p s e n t of covert speeca i n children." D e v e l c p m e n t a l Psych. 5~398-405. 197 1.

Corkin, S. I 1 A c q u i s i t i o n o f motor s k i l l a f t e r b i l a t e r a l medial t e m p o r a l l o b e e x c i s i c n ; N e u r o p s y c h o l , 6: 255- 265. 1968.

C o r l e t t , J.T. " R systems model of p h y s i c a l t r a i n i n g and p e r f o r m a n c e . * u n p u b l i s h e d 8 , S c . thesis, ~ i m c n Fraser ~ n i v e r s f ty. " 977.

Corlett, J, T ., !I. C a l v e r t , and E,Om ~ a n i s t s r , #@The cybernetics of human perfcrrancemn I n "Current T o p i c s I n cybernetics And SystemsH, Springer-Verfaq Pub. Co. ~ e r l i n , 1978. Ed. J. Base.

C r a t t y . , B . 3 . *Rovement ~ e h a v i o u r And Hotor earning". H e Kinipton Pub. C c . London. 1967.

D i c k i n s o n , J , " D i r e c t e d forgetting i n motor s h o s t term nerory J, Hum, Hove, S t u d i e s 1:49-50. 1975.

~ i c k i n s o n , J, " A d a p t a t i o n level and r e t r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n motor s h o r t term memory,* Perc. and d o t o r Skills 44:691-634. 1977,

D i e v e r t , G . L . " R e t e n t i o n a n d c o d i n g i n s h o r t t e r a memory: a c o m p a r i s o n o f s t o r a g e c o d z s f o r d i s t a n c e and l o c a t i c n i n f o r m a t i ~ n . ~ ~ J, Hotor B e h a v i o u r 7 (3) :183-190 . 1'375,

D i e v e r t , G.L. nThe r o l e of v i s i o n a n d k i n e s t h e s i s i n c o d i n g of two d i a e n s i o n a l r o v e m e n t inf o r m a t i o n e n J. Hum. Howement S t u d . 3: 191-198. 1976.

~ iewer t , G , L . a n d E.A. Boy, "Coding strategy for memory e x t e n t i n f o r r n a t i ~ n , ~ ~ J, Exp t . P sych . 4 (6) :666-675. 1978, &,

/ I

Dixon, 9 . J . and f4 .B. Broun , " B i o m e d i c a l Compu te r Prcgrads P-Series8' Unio. O f C a l . Press. 1977.

-

D r u k e r , J. a n d J. Hagen, * D e v e l o p m e n t a l trends i n t h e p r o c e s s i n g . o f t a s k - r e l e v a n t and t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t i n f a r m a t i o n e n C h i l d D e v e l o p l e n t $0: 371-382. 1963.

Dusenberry, t. "A study of t h e effects of training i n ball throwing by c h i l d r e n ages three t o s e v e n , " R e s e a r c h Quarterly 2 3 ~ 9 - 1 4 . 1352.

E b b i n g h a u s , H.I. Cited i n nEemory: A, Contribution To Expezime~%al P s y c h o l o g y H . Dover Press, 8 . P ; A. Roger and C, B u i s e p h u j s , Eds,

E c k e r t , 8.1. and D. Ei. E i c h o s n . w ~ e v e l o p a e n t a i v a r i a b i l i t y i n '

r e a c t i o n tiae.n C h i l d Dev. 48: 452-458. 1977.

E s m e r i c h , H . 3 , a n d B. P, Acke raan . ~Deeelopmental d i f f e r e n c e s i n recall: encoding or retrieval?." J, Expt, Child Psych . 25: 514-5250 1978.

Fergnson, G . A . statistical Analysis I n ~ s y c h o l o g y And E d u c a t i o n . H c G r a w - H i l l Book Co, New Y o r k , N.Y. 1976,

F i s h b e i n , H.D., J, Decker, and P, Ui l cox . "Cross m o d a l i t y transfer of s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n . Brit, J. Psych. 68: 503-508 . 1977.

Fi tzgera ld , J.H. " V e r b a l i z a t i o n effects i n young c h i l d r e n : , c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a b i l i t i e s and t h e use of v e r b a l labels.n C h i l d Dep. 48:604-611. 1977. - ,

Flexner, L, B., J. B. Plexner, a n d R , 8. - ~ o b e r t s , "Stages of memory i n mice treated with acctoxycyc loheximide before o r i a a e d i a t e l y after l e a r n i n g , " 5 6 : 7 3 0 - 7 3 5 . 1967.

G a i t o , 3. w f l o l e c u l a r P s y c h ~ b i o l o g y ~ ~ . ~ . d . Thomas Pub. Co. s p r i n g f i e I l l i n o i s . 1966.

Gerson, R.P. and J,R, Thoaas . "Schema t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e variability within a n o w - P i a g e t i a n f ramework J . !lotor Behavior 9(2): 127-134. 1977.

Hagen, J s B , "The effect of distraction on selective attention." c h i l d Development 38:685-694, 1967.

H a i t h , H., F. Morrisson, K. sheingold and P, Mindes. " S h o r t t9rm nenory f o r v i s u a l information i n c h i l d r e n +and- a d u l t s , " J. E x p t , c h i l d Psych. 9: 454-469. 1970.

H a i t h , H. " D e v e l o p a e n t a l c h a n g e s i n v i s u a l f nf o r m a t i a n proce'ssing and short term v i s u a l aenorpbn Human Deve lopmen t 14: 249-261, 3971,

. Belsoa, H. "Adaptation l e v e l TheoryH. Aarper a n d Ros Pub. Co. N.Y. 1964. LV

r'

Henry , P.I. absolute e r r o r v s . E i n target acciracymfl J . lotor Behavicr 7 : 2 2 7 - 2 2 8 . 1975.

Herman, L.,H. a n d D. R e Bailey. w C a m p a r d t i v e effects of r e t r o a c t i v e a n d p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n m o t o r short term memory.' J . E x p t . P s y c h . 3 6 ( 3 ) :407-4 15. 1970.

\ t

Ricks, J. "The acquisition of ao tor skills i n younq childrenmm Child & v e l o p r e n t 2: 156-158. 1331.

H i c k s , P. and I. Cohn, nLack of p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n a psychomotor t a s k at two r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l s e n J . Rot. Behav. 7: 10 1-104. 1975 .

ill, W . F . "Learning: A S u r v e y O f ~ s y c h o l o g i c a l interpretationsn. C h a n d l e r Pub. CG. 1963r

Hodgk ins , J. WReac t ion time and s p e e d of rcvement i n males and 1 females a t v a r i o u s a g e s . l1 R e s e a r c h Quarterly 34: 335-343. 1963. 1.

U?.CI& C. I. "Principles O f B e h a r i o u r m . Apple ton-Cen t u r y - C r o f t s -._ , Pub, Car-,N Y . 1943.

...

Hyden, H, and E m E g y h a z i . ' INuc l ea r R H A c h a n g e s of nerve ce l l s d u r i n g a l e a r n i n g e x p e r i m e n t in ratsen P r o c . Nat. Acad. S c i . 48: 1366 -1373 , 1962.

J e n k i n s , J .G. and K . 8. D a l l e n b a c h . l f ~ b l i v e s c e n c e d w i n g sleep a n d waking." Amer. J. P s y c h . 35:605-612. 1924. 2 J o n e s , B, , n ~ o l e o f c e n t r a l m o n i t o r i n g of efference i n s h o r t term memory f a r ~ o v e p e n t s . ~ ~ J. E x p t . Psych. 102: 37-43. 1974.

J u n q , J, "Verbal L e a r n i n g n . Holt, R i n e h a r t , a n d inst ton Pub. Co. H.Y. 1972.

Kay, H, " I n f o r m a t i o n t h e o r y i n t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f skill^,^ O c c u p a t i o n a l P s y c h 3 1: 218-224. 1957.

Keele, S.U. n A t t e n t i o n a n d Human P e r f o r ~ a n c e ~ ~ . G o o d g e a r P u L Co. paci f ic P a l i s a d e s , Ca. 1973.

Keesey, T., S. C a n i z z o , amd J , P lave l l . n S p o n t a n e a u s and induced v e r b a l rehearsal i n a r e c a l l t a s k . " Child Develcpment 38: 953-966. 1967, -

Kelso, J. a n d G, S t e l m a c h , " C e n t r a l and p e r i p h e r a l mechanisms i n motor c o n t r o l e n I n "Motcr C o n t r o l I s s u e s a n d T r e n d s n . A c a d s a i c P r e s s , New P o r k , 1976. Ed. G . E . S t e l m a c h .

-Kerr, B, w ~ r o c e s s i n g ' demands d u r i n g mental o p e r a t i o n s . " fferrery and Coqn. 1:401-412. 1973.

Kolers, P. A. * I n t e r l i n g u a l f a c i l i t a t i o n of s h o r t term memory. J. Verb, Learn, and Verb. Behav. 5:314-319. 1966.

K r e u g e r , it, #The effect o f o v e r l e a r n i n g o n ret n t i o n m n J. E ~ p t m Psych . 12:71-78. 1934. -4 K r u p s k i , 15, and P.R. B o y l e , "An o b s e r v a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s of c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o u r during s i m p l e r e a c t i o n t i n e t a s k : t h e '

r o l e o f a t t e n t i o n e n C h i l d Dev, 49: 340-347. 1378, %, A

Keppel, G, a n d B.J. Underwood. " P r o a c t i v e i n h i b i t i o n i n s h o r t term r e t e n t i o n o f s i n g l e itemsmn 3. Verb. Lea rn . a n d Verb. Behav. 1: 153- 16 1. 1962.

. Laabs , G , J . "Betention c h a r a c t e r i s t ~ c s of d i f f e r e n t r e p r o d u c t i o n c u e s i n motor s h o r t term a e m o r y e t ~ J. Expt. P s y c h 100: 168-177.

, 1973.

L a a b s , G , J . U n p u b l i s h e d Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n , Univ. of Oregon. 1971 ,

L a a b s , G . J . "The e f f e c t of i n t e r p o l a t e d m o t o r activity on the s h o r t term. r e t e n t i o n cf movement distance and end l o c a t i o n e n J. aot . Behav. 6:279-288. 1974.

Lenba, J.H. WThe i n f l u e n c e of d u r a t i o n and rate of cur movements upon judgemen t of t h e i r l e n g t h , " Amer. cJ. Psych, 20:374-385. 1909.

L o n g s t r e t h , L ,E , and V. Z o l t a n . n D 8 v e l o p m e n t a l c h a n g e s i n r e t e n t i o n : . independent cf age?n 3. E x p t . C h i l d Psych, 26: 115-121. 1978

rlarteniak, R.G. m8etention c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f motor short term memory." J, Mot, Behav. 5~249-259. 1973.

f l a r t e n i u k , R . G . , K. Shields, a n d S, C a r p b e l l , n ~ ~ p l i t ~ d e , p o s i t i o n , t i m i n g , and v e l o c i t y a s cues i n r e p r o d u c t i o n of move~ent.~ Perc . and Rot, Skills 35351-513. 1972.

aart i n , E. n T r a n s f a r of v e r b a l paired associatesn. Psych. Rev. 72:327-3Y3. 1965.

E c C o n n e l l , J. B , nfiemory transfer through c a n n i b a l i s m i n p l a n a r i a n s J., ~ e u r o p s p c h i a t . 3:42-49. 1362 ,

HcGeoch, J . B . and A . L . I r ian . "The P S y c h o l o g y O f Human L e a r n i n g " . HcKay Fub. Co. W.Y 1952 .

f l e l t o n , A,%. and J.H. l r w i n m n T h e i n f l u e n c e of d e g r e e of i n t e r p o l a t e d l e a r n i n g o n r e t r o a c t i v e i n h i b i t i o n and t h e o v e r t - t r a n s f e r o f s p e c i f i c r e s p c n s e ~ . ~ Amer. J. P s y c h , 53: 173-203. 1940.

J, n F l e x i o n - e x t e n s i o n s e n s i t i v i t y o f elbov joint i n cat ." Exp, rain ~ e s . ,24:209-214. 1975 .

Hiker, 8 . . S. Corkin, a n d H.L. T e u b e r . " F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of t h e ' h i p p o c a a p a l amnesic syndrcme : 1 4 year f o l l o w u p of R.w, H. N e n r o p s y c h o l . 6 ~ 2 1 5 - 2 3 4 . 1968.

Hon tagu , B,E, a n d B, A, R i l l i r . " I n t e r t r i a l i n t e r v a l a n d p r o a c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n short term m e ~ o r y . ' ~ Can. J, Psych. 2 2 ~ 7 3 - 7 8 . 1968.

l i e m a r k , Em, Slotnick, and T. U l r i c h . w ~ e v e l o p m e n t of m e m o r i z a t i o n s t r a t e g i e s . " D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h , 5: 427-432. 1371 ,

o s g o o d , C. Em nThe s i m i l a r i t y paradox i n human l e a r n i n g : a r e s o l ~ t i o e . ~ Psych. Rev, 56: 132-143. 1949 .

Pavlov, I. C i t e d in " L e a r n i n g : P r o c e s s e s n , f l a c H i l l a e Pub. Co. N.Y. 1964. ,

Peppe r , B.L. a n d L, !¶. Herman, "Decay a n d i n t e r f e r e n c e e f f e c t s i n - s h o r t term r e t e n t i o n of a d i s c r e t e aotar task," J , Bxpt. Psych. Nono. Supp. 83: 1-18. 1970 ,

P e t e r s o n , L, and M. P e t e r s o n , n S h o r t term r e t e n t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l I itensmu J. Expt. Psych . 58: 193-198. 1959 .

P e t e r s o n , LOR., K, H i l n e f , and 'He ~altzlpan. V i n e between p a i ~ i n g s and s h o r t term memory,n J. E x p t . Psych . 58: 193-198. 1962,

P o s n e r , II. I. " C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o'f v i s u a l a n d k i n e s t h e t i c memory c o d e s . * J. E x ~ t , Pspch. 74: 103- 107. 1967.

Pos tman, L. "The p r e s e n t s t a tu s of i n t e r f e r e n c e t h e o r y . " I n **Verba l Language And V e r b a l E e h a v i o u r H . H c G r a w - B i l l Pub, Co. N . Y . Ed. C.H, Cofer.

Rarick, G.L. " C o n c e p t s of notor learning: i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r s k i l l d e v e l o p m e n t i n c h i l d r e n , n I n " C h i l d I n S p o r t a n d Physical ~ c t i v i t p ~ . Univ. Park Press, Baltimore, Ild, 1978. Eds , J, A l b i n s o n and G. Andrew.

Reiber, H e " a e d i a t i o n a l a i d s and motor s k i l l l e a r n i n g i n c h i l d r e n , " C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t 34: 559-567, 1968.

R o b i n s o n , E, S. . "The s i m i l a r i t y f ac to r i n ' r e t r o a c t i ~ n . ~ Amer, J. Psych. 39: 297-312, 1927 ,

4

Roy, E.A. w P l e a s u r i n g c h a n g e i n motor m e m o ~ y . ~ J. notor B e h a v i o u r 8:283-287. 1976.

,'

S c h a t i d t , R . A , '*The schema as a s o l u t i o n t o some p e r s i s t e n t problems i n motor learning t h e o r y . " Psych. Rev. 82: 225-26C. '19?5.

schutz, Re a n d E m A. Roy. " A b s o l u t e error: the d e v i l i n d i s g u i s e e n J. Motor B e h a v i o r 5: 141-153, 1973. ,

% -

S h e i n g o l d , K . t t D e v e l o p m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n intake a n d s t o r a g e of visual m a t e r i a l m l * J. E x p t . C h i l d Psych . 16:l-11. 1973. % -

S i n g e r , R e B e " P h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , p e r c e p t u a l - r o t o r , a n d intelligence differences between t h i r d a n d s i x t h g r a d e r s , " R e s e a r c h Q u a r t e r l y 40: 803-81 1. 1969 ,

S i n q e r , R.3, "Hotor L B a r n i n g And Humad P e r f o r m a n c e n . n a c h i l l a n ,

P)lbeCom I. Y e 1975, I

Skinner, 0 . And Human ~ e h a v i o u r ~ . nacni l lan pub. Co. %.Ye 1953,

Skinner, B. today . t l ~ m e ~ i c a n P s y c h c l , 1 3 ~ 9 4 - 9 9 ,

S i n o t h e r g i l l , D . w . n A c c u r a c y a n d v a r i a b i l i t y i n l o c a l i z a t i o n of s p a t i a l t a r g e t s a t t h r e e a g e levels.1g D e v e l c p m e n t a l P s y c h * 8 ~ 6 2 - 6 6 . 1973 .

s p e r l i n g , G. "The information a v a i l a b l e i n b r i e f v i s u a l Psych, f lonographs , 74. 1960.

s r o n f e , L.A. "Age c h a n g e s i n cardiac d e c e l e r a t i o n w i t h i n .a f i x e d f o r e p e r i o d r e a c t i o n time task: an i n d e x of a t t e n t i o n . " D e v e l o p m e n t a l Psych, 5 ~ 3 3 8 - 3 4 3 , 1371.

I S t e l m a c h , G. B, a n d H. Wilson. ines esthetic r e t e n t i o n , rovemeat e x t e n t , and i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s l n q e w -. J. E x p t , P s y c h . 85: 425-430. 1970.

S t e l m a c h , G.E. n K i n e s t h e t i c i n f o r m a t i o n r e d u c t i o n a c t i v i t y . " J. I o t , Behav. 2: 183-194. 1970.

S t e l m a c h , G.E. " i R e t e n t i o n of motor s k i l l s m N I n "Exercise and S p o r t Sciences R e v i e w s n . Vo1.2. ~ c a d e m i c Press, N.Y. Ed, J. Pilmwe. 1974.

S t e l m a c h , G. E:, S.A. U a l l a c e , and H. Hecracken. n L o c a t i o n d u r a t i o n i n d l s t a n c e r e ~ r o d u c t i o n ~ ~ I n N P ~ y c h o l o g y C f H o t o r B e h a v i o u r and SportH, Vol. 1 . Human K i n . Pub. C h a m ~ a i g n , Ill . Eds . D e n , L a n d e r s a ~ d R.B. C h r i s t i n a . 1976.

I .

Tanner, J . 8 . "Grovth A t A d o l e s c e n c e n . 2nd Ed. Oxford: E l a c k w e l l S c i e n t i f i c P u b l i c a t i o n s . 1962.

Tannes., 5. E. #From F e t u s To PlanW, Aarvard Univ. P r e s s . Cambr idge , Mass. ,1978. *

, Thompson, D. "Grovth And ~ d r o f i . Rev. .Ed. London. 1942.

T h o r n d i k e , E m L, c i t e d i n "Lea rn ing : P r o c e s s e s N . f lacfli l lan Pub, Co. Hew York.- Ed, H e Harx. 1364. - * Tolaan, E. C. "Theories O f I ,e 'arningn. I n " C c m p a r a t i ve P s y c h o l o g y n . P r a n t i c e - H a l l Pub, Cc. Bnglewood C l i f f s , N. J. 1934.

Tolman, Bed. "The re is more than one k i n d of l e a r n i n g m . .Psych. I . Rev. 56: 144-155, - . . ,

T r a c e y , % D . J . m ~ h a r ' a c t e r i s t i c s cf wrist j o i n t receptors i n t h e cat. 8f EEP. B r a i n R s s . .3 4: 165- 176. 1979.

.- , -

T u l v i n g , ED " S u b j e c t i v e o r g a n f z a t ' i o n in free reca l l o f unrelated words. Psych , Rev, 69:344-354, 1962,

I3nderw00d, B. J. "False r e c o g n i t i o n p roduced by implicit- v e r b a l r e s p o n s e s , * 3. Expt . Psych, 70: 122- 129. 1965.

Uadervood, 8.3, "Speed o f l e a r n i n g and amount r e t a i n e d z ' a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a e t h o d o l ~ g y . ~ Psych, B u l l . 5 1: 276-282. 1954.

Uatson, J. B. n B e h a v i o u r i s a n , U.P. Horton and Co. I . P . 1930,

welford, A.T. ~ P n n d a n e n a t a l s Of S k i l l " . Hethnen and Co. London, 1968.

Heist, P.B. and J . C r a u f o r d . "The deve lopment o f o r g a n i z e d rehearsal. J, ~ x p t . ~ Child Psych, 24: 164-179, 1977..

r-*

i i i c k e l g r s n , U,A, " S p a r i n g of short tern memory in a t amnesic patient: i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r s t r e n g t h t hear y cf memory Ueuropsycho l , 6: 235-244. 1968.

Hild, a.8. nThe b e h a v i o u r pattern o f t h f o w i n g and scae o b s e r v a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g i ts course on the ,development i n c h i l d r e n . " R e s e a r c h Q u a r t e r l y 9:20-24. 1938,

i l i l l i a a s , I . D . nThe effects of p r a c t i c e trials and pr ior l e a r n i n g on aotor memoryDn J, Hotor B e h a v i o n r 3 ~ 2 0 5 - 2 1 1 . 1971.

~ s l a z n i k , 8.8. " T r a n s f e r i n r a p i d t i m i n g t a s k s : a n axas inat ion o f t h e role o f v a r i a b i l i t y i n p r a c t i c e , " I n n P s y c h o l o g y O f Hotor ~ e h a v i o u r and S p o r t n , Ruaan in. Press, Champaign, Ill, Eds. . D . 8 . L a n d e r s and B,P Christina. 1976.

APPBHDIP 1: A POSTERIORI AIALISIS OF SIGRIPICAIIT H A I H

EFFECTS OF EXPERIBElTS 1, 2, &BD 3

Appendix 1 presents t h e r e s u l t s of a posteriori a n a l y s i s of

significant s a i n effects described i n t h e t e x t in Tables 1 and 2. JI

Only a b s o l u t e error main effects are c o n s i d e r e d here s i n c e they

are the o n l y ones around which t h e discussion of derelopment has

r e v o l v e d . C a l c u l a t i o n s were done u s i n g the method of S c h e f f e a s '

d e s c r i b e d by Ferguson (1976) . cr i t ica l P v a l u e s were chosen to

test s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e a t the 0 . 0 5 level.

The f o l l o w i n g abbreviations are used i n t h i s a p p e n d i x :

GB3 = G R A P E 3

G R 6 = G R A D E 6

1OCB = 10 CEBTIHETEB HOVE8ENTS

20CH = 20 CENTIBETEE f4OVEaENTS

OSEC = 0 S E C O M RETENTION I H T E R V A I

1SSEC = 15 SECOND RETENTION INTERVAL

30SEC = 30 SECOND BETENTIOH ,INTERVAL

COB = CONTROL GBOUP, EXPERIBEHT 2

DP = DIRECTED F O B G E T T I B G , EXPEBIHEBT 2 A

NDF = NO DIRECTED FORGE'PTIBG, EXPEBIHENT 2

CALC.ULATED P CRITICAL /F 'I

OSEC - 1SSEC 38.62

OSEC - 3 0 S E C 280 .OO

CON - DP 13.32

DP - blDP 2 2 . 5 6

CON - BDP - 7 0 . 5 6 -

Documents

Developmental aspects of motor short term memorysummit.sfu.ca/system/files/iritems1/3276/b12244144.pdf · C J / tionale CANADIAN THESES . ---- ---- TH~SES CANAOIE~NES ON MICROFICHE