1,225
Views
16
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Motivational effects of enhancing expectancies and autonomy for motor learning: An examination of the OPTIMAL theory

Pages 79-92 | Received 30 Mar 2018, Accepted 07 Oct 2018, Published online: 17 Jan 2019

References

  • Abdollahipour, R., Nieto, M. P., Psotta, R., & Wulf, G. (2017). External focus of attention and autonomy support have additive benefits for motor performance in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 32, 17–24. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.05.004
  • Al-Abood, S. A., Davids, K., & Bennett, S. J. (2001). Specificity of task constraints and effects of visual demonstrations and verbal instructions in directing learners. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33(3), 295–305. doi:10.1080/00222890109601915
  • Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2011). Feedback after good trials enhances intrinsic motivation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(2), 360–364. doi:10.5641/027013611X13119541884347
  • Badami, R., VaezMousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2012). Feedback about more accurate versus less accurate trials: Differential effects on self-confidence and activation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83(2), 196–203. doi:10.1080/02701367.2012.10599850
  • Chiviacowsky, S. (2014). Self-controlled practice: Autonomy protects perceptions of competence and enhances motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15(5), 505–510. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.05.003
  • Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2002). Self-controlled feedback: Does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it?. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73(4), 408–415. doi:10.1080/02701367.2002.10609040
  • Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2007). Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78(2), 40–47.
  • Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., de Medeiros, F. L., Kaefer, A., & Tani, G. (2008). Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year old children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(3),405–410. doi:10.1080/02701367.2008.10599505
  • Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., Wally, R., & Borges, T. (2009). KR after good trials enhances learning in older adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80(3), 663–668. doi:10.1080/02701367.2009.10599606
  • Ewell, L. A., & Leutgeb, S. (2014). Replay to remember: A boost from dopamine. Nature Neuroscience, 17(12), 1629–1631.
  • Magill, R. A. (2013). Motor learning and control (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Saemi, E., Porter, J. M., Ghotbi-Varzaneh, A., Zarghami, M., & Maleki, F. (2012). Knowledge of results after relatively good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(4), 378–382. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.12.008
  • Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 355–386.
  • Sanli, E. A., Patterson, J. T., Bray, S. R., & Lee, T. D. (2013). Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the Self-Determination Theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(Article 611),611. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00611
  • Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2011). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (5th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • Wise, R. A. (2004). Dopamine, learning and motivation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 1–12.
  • Wulf, G., Chiviacowsky, S., & Cardozo, P. (2014). Additive benefits of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies for motor learning. Human Movement Science, 37, 12–20. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2014.06.004
  • Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1382–1414.
  • Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., Cardozo, P., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2018). Triple play: Additive contributions of enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and external attentional focus to motor learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(4),824–831. doi:10.1080/17470218.2016.1276204

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.