The role of autonomy-support and enhanced expectations in motivation and learning of a throwing task

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education, Payam Noor University, Urmia, Urmia, Iran.

2 Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.

3 Department of Sport Sciences, Ur, C., Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the role of autonomy-support and enhanced expectations in motivation and motor learning.
Methods: Sixty students were randomly assigned into 4 groups of 15 members. These groups were Autonomy Support + Enhanced Expectations (members were provided with the right to choose the throwing spot + received positive feedback on their performance progress); Enhanced Expectations (provided with positive feedback on their performance progress); Autonomy Support (provided with the right to choose the throwing spot); and a Control group (without any instruction). Participants performed a throwing task in the practice phase of 60 trials in a 2 x 2 design, (autonomy-support: Yes/No) * (enhanced expectations: Yes/No). Participants completed the motivation scale and then the retention tests with a delay of 2 hours and 24 hours.
Results: Analysis of variance showed that the main effect of autonomy-support on retention is significant (p=0.008). However, the main effect of enhanced expectations and the interaction effect of the two factors is not significant (p=0.40). In addition, both factors of autonomy-support (p=0.002) and enhanced expectancies (p=0.01) have additive effects on motivation.
Conclusion: The two factors of autonomy-support and enhanced expectations have additive benefits on motivation. Nevertheless, the main mechanism of the effect of these two factors on motor learning can be different.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Dana A, Baniasadi T, Salehian MH, Sarvari S. Effects of Enhanced Expectancies and Autonomy Support on Learning Medical Motor Skills. Annals of Military and Health Sciences Research. 2022;20(1). 10.5812/amh.120109.
  2. Pollok F, Cook DA, Shaikh N, Pankratz VS, Morrey ME, Laack TA. Autonomy and focus of attention in medical motor skills learning: a randomized experiment. BMC medical education. 2022;22(1):1-9. 10.1186/s12909-021-03020-z.
  3. Lewthwaite R, Chiviacowsky S, Drews R, Wulf G. Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review. 2015;22(5):1383-8. 10.3758/s13423-015-0814-7.
  4. Wulf G, Adams N. Small choices can enhance balance learning. Human Movement Science. 2014;38:235-40. 10.1016/j.humov.2014.10.007.
  5. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review. 2016;23(5):1382-414. 10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9.
  6. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Frontiers in psychology. 2012;3:458. 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00458.
  7. Velayati F, Mousavi SM, Ahmadinejad A, Abedanzadeh R. Optimizing Teenage Girls’ Motor Learning through Autonomy Support, Enhanced Expectancies, and External Focus of Attention: A Test of the OPTIMAL Theory. Sports Psychology. 2022. 10.29252/MBSP.2022.227052.1113.
  8. Komeili R, Bahram A, Parvinpour S, Yaali R. Motor learning in a self-controlled environment supporting basic psychological needs: Mediating of intrinsic motivation. Sports Psychology. 2020;5(1):27-45. 20.1001.1.26763729.1399.5.1.3.4

9          Post PG, Fairbrother JT, Barros JA, Kulpa J. Self-controlled practice within a fixed time period facilitates the learning of a basketball set shot. Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2014;2(1):9-15. 10.1123/jmld.2013-0008.

  1. Iwatsuki T, Abdollahipour R, Psotta R, Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Autonomy facilitates repeated maximum force productions. Human movement science. 2017;55:264-8. 10.1016/j.humov.2017.08.016.
  2. Lemos A, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R, Chiviacowsky S. Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2017;31:28-34. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.03.009.
  3. Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Grand challenge for movement science and sport psychology: embracing the social-cognitive–affective–motor nature of motor behavior. Frontiers in psychology. 2010;1:42. 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00042.
  4. Ávila LT, Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Positive social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2012;13(6):849-53. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.07.001.
  5. Chiviacowsky S, Harter NM, Gonçalves GS, Cardozo PL. Temporal-comparative feedback facilitates golf putting. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019;9:2691. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02691.
  6. McKay B, Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Enhanced expectancies improve performance under pressure. Frontiers in psychology. 2012;3:8. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00008.
  7. Stoate I, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Enhanced expectancies improve movement efficiency in runners. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2012;30(8):815-23. 10.1080/02640414.2012.671533.
  8. Wehlmann JA, Wulf G. Bullseye: Effects of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies on dart throwing. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2021;16(2):317-23. 10.1177/1747954120967788.
  9. Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Cardozo PL. Additive benefits of autonomy support and enhanced expectancies for motor learning. Human movement science. 2014;37:12-20. 10.1016/j.humov.2014.06.004.
  10. Simpson T, Cronin L, Ellison P, Carnegie E, Marchant D. A test of optimal theory on young adolescents' standing long jump performance and motivation. Human Movement Science. 2020;72:102651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102651
  11. Abdollahipour R, Nieto MP, Psotta R, Wulf G. External focus of attention and autonomy support have additive benefits for motor performance in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2017;32:17-24. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.05.004.
  12. Wulf G, Lewthwaite R, Cardozo P, Chiviacowsky S. Triple play: Additive contributions of enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and external attentional focus to motor learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2018;71(4):824-31. 10.1080/17470218.2016.1276204.
  13. Hutchinson JC, Sherman T, Martinovic N, Tenenbaum G. The effect of manipulated self-efficacy on perceived and sustained effort. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2008;20(4):457-72. 10.1080/10413200802351151.
  14. Guay F, Vallerand RJ, Blanchard C. On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and emotion. 2000;24(3):175-213. 10.1023/A:1005614228250.
  15. Abedanzade R, Abdeli B, Ahmadi N, Ramazanzadeh H. Determining the validity and reliability of the situational motivation scale in middle school boys in Tehran. Journal of Sport Management and Motor Behavior. 2016;12(24):85-96. 10.22080/jsmb.2016.1292.
  16. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry. 2000;11(4):227-68. 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.
  17. Legault L, Inzlicht M. Self-determination, self-regulation, and the brain: autonomy improves performance by enhancing neuroaffective responsiveness to self-regulation failure. Journal of personality and social psychology. 2013;105(1):123. 10.1037/a0030426.
  18. Lewthwaite R, Wulf G. Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. 2010;63(4):738-49. 10.1080/17470210903111839.

 

 

Sports Psychology
Volume 17, Issue 1
2025
Pages 112-128

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 January 2023
  • Revise Date: 11 June 2023
  • Accept Date: 29 August 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics