JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE & MEDICINE
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK METHODS ON THE OUTCOME AND SELF CONFIDENCE OF YOUNG ATHLETES
George Tzetzis1, Evandros Votsis1 and Thomas Kourtessis2
1Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, Greece
2Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
© Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2008) 7, 371 - 378
Search Google Scholar for Citing Articles
|This experiment investigated the effects of three corrective feedback
methods, using different combinations of correction, or error cues and positive
feedback for learning two badminton skills with different difficulty (forehand
clear - low difficulty, backhand clear - high difficulty). Outcome and self-confidence
scores were used as dependent variables. The 48 participants were randomly
assigned into four groups. Group A received correction cues and positive
feedback. Group B received cues on errors of execution. Group C received
positive feedback, correction cues and error cues. Group D was the control
group. A pre, post and a retention test was conducted. A three way analysis
of variance ANOVA (4 groups X 2 task difficulty X 3 measures) with repeated
measures on the last factor revealed significant interactions for each depended
variable. All the corrective feedback methods groups, increased their outcome
scores over time for the easy skill, but only groups A and C for the difficult
skill. Groups A and B had significantly better outcome scores than group
C and the control group for the easy skill on the retention test. However,
for the difficult skill, group C was better than groups A, B and D. The
self confidence scores of groups A and C improved over time for the easy
skill but not for group B and D. Again, for the difficult skill, only group
C improved over time. Finally a regression analysis depicted that the improvement
in performance predicted a proportion of the improvement in self confidence
for both the easy and the difficult skill. It was concluded that when young
athletes are taught skills of different difficulty, different type of instruction,
might be more appropriate in order to improve outcome and self confidence.
A more integrated approach on teaching will assist coaches or physical education
teachers to be more efficient and effective.
Key words: Instructional cues, badminton skills, difficulty.
Effective instruction may be crucial to the pursuit of optimal
sporting performance. The most significant role of the physical education
teacher or the coach is to give information about the skills' execution
in the form of feedback (Hodges and Franks, 2002)
and has been found to be a key tool in improving and learning motor skills
(Schmidt and Wrisberg, 2004).
According to the cognitive approach the role of instructions and criticism
on performance is a crucial factor for learning (Wulf and Shea, 2004)
however, the ecological (Gibson, 1979)
and dynamical systems approach (Kelso, 1981;
Stergiou, Harbourne and Cavanaugh, 2006)
of performance and learning support that information about the movement
from an external source feedback is a second order constraint.
of the skills
of the instructor
separate one-way ANOVAs' indicated that there were no initial differences
(means and standard deviations in Table 1) of the pre-test scores for the four groups of low
(FF2,45 = 2.85, p > 0.05) or high difficulty skill (F2,45 = 0.53, p
of groups and difficulty level
between outcome and self confidence
| This experiment
was designed to investigate how different types of corrective feedback improve
learning of a skill and alter self confidence of the participants. It was
hypothesized that providing both positive feedback and error correction
cues could improve outcome and self confidence scores, for easy and difficult
skills, across time for youth participants. This study is limited by the
testing of outcome scores through a specialized badminton field test and
the testing of self confidence through a sport confidence inventory administered
prior to the testing.
From the critical review of Salmoni Schmidt and Walter (1984) until the more recent studies (Wulf and Shea, 2004) the attempt was to shed new light on the role of feedback for motor learning and enrich the guidance hypothesis. The recommendations were to conduct research in more realistic conditions and test more complex skills. This research investigated the effectiveness of three methods of corrective feedback, on acquisition and retention of the outcome and self-confidence, for two fundamental badminton skills with different difficulty level. There was an attempt to provide a suitable basis for establishing principles and guidelines for improvement of the outcome of the execution and self-confidence.
From the findings of this research it can be concluded that different instructional models of corrective feedback can have a different effect on both outcome and self-confidence for skills with different difficulty. Similar results were found by other researchers (Williams andHodges, 2005, Wulf and Shea, 2004).
It was found that almost all groups improved their outcome scores over time except group that received only error cues for the difficult skill. It seems that information for corrections of errors is more important for difficult skills. Probably the adjustments required to facilitate performance on subsequent practice attempts for difficult skills may not be readily apparent and consequently both feedback types might be necessary especially with beginners or experienced younger athletes (Kernodle and Carlton, 1992; Tzetzis et al., 2002).
The group that received error cues and the one received positive feedback and correction cues had better outcome scores than the group received both feedback types, for the easy skill. However, the opposite was the case for the difficult skill. It can be concluded that for the low difficulty skills, information concerning error correction, or identification, is enough for the improvement of the execution. Participants seemed to have the ability to know their errors or how to correct them. It seems that for relatively simple movements, feedback can either have a descriptive role, alerting the learner of the error committed, or a prescriptive role, informing the performer as to what to do to correct the error. Schmidt and Wulf, 1997 asserted that very analytical and complicated instruction about correct responses and errors may be redundant and unnecessary for less difficulty skills. Kernodle et al., 2001 also suggested that when the difficulty of the execution is high, it is more useful for athletes to get information for both errors and their correction. The implication is that when the task to be learnt is easy descriptive or prescriptive feedback improves learning but when the task is fairly difficult, players may require a combination of both prescriptive and descriptive feedback to improve performance (Williams and Hodges 2007; Wulf et al., 1998).
It is also important to note that feedback assisted young athletes to learn and retain their performance, since there was no decrease of the outcome scores from the acquisition to the retention period. It seems that the use of this type of instruction had long learning effects on performance.
In this experiment it was investigated how the types of corrective feedback can alter self confidence and whether they interact with the difficulty level of the skills. Both groups that received positive and correction cues improved their self-confidence over time and were better than group that receiving only error cues for the easy skill. It might be assumed that positive feedback had a positive effect on athletes' self confidence. Pulford and Colman, 1997 supported that if feedback is positive and show that the goal is being achieved confidence increases, whereas, if the feedback is negative, then confidence decreases (or remain stable if the feedback is disregarded, for example to protect self-esteem).
The self-confidence scores of the difficult skill improved over time but only for the group that received positive feedback, error and correction cues. This group had also better self confidence scores than the other two groups. It seems that in difficult skills, positive feedback must be combined with error and correction cues, because is perceived by the participants as supportive information that leads to self confidence improvement. It is concluded that the nature of the task is an important moderator of self confidence when young athletes learn new skills (Moritz et al., 2000). Bunker, 1991 suggested that children acquire self-confidence as a result of successful experiences. This was found from the relationship of the outcome and self confidence scores. Badminton is a game that relies heavily on individual performance and players' confidence is vulnerable when they are unsuccessful. Matching challenges (tasks) to learners is useful in order to enhance their self confidence.
It seems that the type of the skill is a critical factor in determining the effectiveness and the appropriateness of the corrective feedback types. It was concluded that different instructional methods of corrective feedback could have beneficial effects in terms of the outcome and self-confidence. Tzetzis et al., 1999 and Tzetzis and Votsis, 2006 found similar results and they suggested that the improvement of the performance depends on the content of information and the complexity of the skills.
|The conclusions may be important for instructors concerning the use of corrective feedback and reward in skill learning. Instructions focusing on the correct cues or errors increase participants' performance of easy skills. Instructions should be addressed for both the correct and the errors of the execution of difficult skills. Positive feedback or correction cues increase self-confidence of easy skills but only the combination of error and correction cues increase self confidence of difficult skills. This study is limited by the feedback models used for semi-experienced participants in badminton. It is not appropriate to make any generalizations that go beyond the scope of this research. Since feedback plays a powerful role in guiding the performance future studies should view the interaction of feedback with factors such as the availability of intrinsic feedback, the learners' level of experience and the degree to which feedback influence psychological mood of the participants. It is clear that much research is needed if we want to come to a more complete understanding of the role of feedback in the learning process.|
Employment: Assistant Professor in the Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences of the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki.
Research interests: Motor learning and control, physical education teaching, research and physical activity.
Employment: PhD student in the Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences of the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki.
Research interests: Motor learning, motor control and motor behavior, psychological development of youths.
Employment: Assistant Professor in Physical Education and Sport Sciences of the Democritus University of Thrace.
Research interests: Motor coordination focusing on developmental coordination disorders.