نقش خودمختاری و انتظارات‌افزایش‌یافته در انگیزش و یادگیری یک تکلیف حرکتی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه تربیت بدنی، دانشگاه پیام نور، مرکز ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران.

2 گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشکده علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران.

3 گروه تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، واحد ارومیه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ارومیه، ایران

چکیده

هدف: هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی نقش خودمختاری و انتظارات افزایش‌یافته در انگیزش و یادگیری یک تکلیف حرکتی پرتابی بود.
روش‌ها:60 دانشجوی شرکت‌کننده به طور تصادفی در 4 گروه 15 نفری شامل خودمختاری+ انتظارات‌افزایش‌یافته (ارائه حق انتخاب محل پرتاب + بازخورد مثبت پیشرفت اجرا)، انتظارات‌افزایش‌یافته (بازخورد مثبت پیشرفت اجرا)، خودمختاری (ارائه حق انتخاب محل پرتاب) و کنترل (بدون دستورالعمل) تقسیم شدند. شرکت‌کنندگان در یک طرح عاملی 2 * 2 (با و بدون‌خودمختاری) * (با و بدون انتظارات افزایش‌یافته)، یک تکلیف پرتابی را در مرحله تمرین در 60 کوشش اجرا کردند و مقیاس انگیزش را تکمیل کردند. سپس، آزمون یادداری با تاخیر 2 ساعت و 24 ساعت اجرا شد.
نتایج: نتایج تحلیل واریانس عاملی برای آزمون یادداری، نشان داد اثر اصلی عامل خودمختاری معنادار می باشد (008/0P=). اما اثر اصلی عامل انتظارات‌افزایش‌یافته، و تعامل بین دو عامل معنادار نمی‌باشد (40/0P=). علاوه بر این، هر دو عامل خودمختاری (002/0P=) و انتظارات افزایش‌یافته (01/0P=)، اثرات افزایشی بر انگیزش‌درونی دارند.
نتیجه‌گیری: عوامل خودمختاری و انتظارات افزایش‌یافته، فواید افزایشی بر انگیزش درونی دارند. با‌این‌وجود، مکانیسم اصلی تاثیر این دو عامل در یادگیری حرکتی می‌تواند متفاوت باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

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

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mandana Heydari 1
  • Hasan Mohammadzadeh 2
  • malek Ahmadi 3
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.
چکیده [English]

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.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Autonomy-support
  • Enhanced expectations
  • Motivation
  • Motor learning

مراجع

  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.

 

 

روانشناسی ورزش
دوره 17، شماره 1
1404
صفحه 112-128

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 21 دی 1401
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 21 خرداد 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 07 شهریور 1402

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار