Effect of positive social comparative feedback on the resting state connectivity of dopaminergic neural pathways: A preliminary investigation.

Positive social comparative feedback is hypothesized to generate a dopamine response in the brain, similar to reward, by enhancing expectancies to support motor skill learning. However, no studies have utilized neuroimaging to examine this hypothesized dopaminergic mechanism. Therefore, the aim of this preliminary study was to investigate the effect of positive social comparative feedback on dopaminergic neural pathways measured by resting state connectivity. Thirty individuals practiced an implicit, motor sequence learning task and were assigned to groups that differed in feedback type. One group received feedback about their actual response time to complete the task (RT ONLY), while the other group received feedback about their response time with positive social comparison (RT + POS). Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired at the beginning and end of repetitive motor practice with feedback to measure practice-dependent changes in resting state brain connectivity. While both groups showed improvements in task performance and increases in performance expectancies, ventral tegmental area and the left nucleus accumbens (mesolimbic dopamine pathway) resting state connectivity increased in the RT + POS group but not in the RT ONLY group. Instead, the RT ONLY group showed increased connectivity between ventral tegmental area and primary motor cortex. Positive social comparative feedback during practice of a motor sequence task may induce a dopaminergic response in the brain along the mesolimbic pathway. However, given that absence of effects on expectancies and motor learning, more robust and individualized approaches may be needed to provide beneficial psychological and behavioral effects.

The effect of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on motor learning in children at risk for developmental coordination disorder.

Numerous efforts have been made to test the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in healthy children and adult populations. However, only a small number of studies have tested this theory in children with cognitive-motor disorders, such as developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The present study aims to examine the individual and additive effects of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on a golf putting task in children at risk for DCD based on the OPTIMAL theory. Forty children at risk for DCD (mean age = 8.57 ± 1.05 years) were randomly assigned to four experimental groups (1-small visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 2-big visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 3-small visual illusion + yoked; 4-big visual illusion + yoked). Following 12 pretest trials of a golf putting task, the participants completed 5 blocks of 12 trials of practice on the first day. A retention test (12 trials) and a transfer dual-task test (12 trials) were conducted on the second day. The results indicated that in retention test the big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group was significantly better than the small visual illusion + yoked group (p = 0.01), while there was not any other significant difference between groups at retention test as well as between all groups at practice phase and transfer test (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). In other words, an additive effect has been observed just in the retention test but not the practice phase as well as transfer test. In general, the results of this study support the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in children at risk for DCD and suggests to all educators who work with these children to use the combination of the visual illusion with self-controlled practice to improve the motor learning of children at risk for DCD.

Optimizing Motor Learning in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: According to the Optimizing Performance Through Intrinsic Motivation and Attention for Learning (OPTIMAL) theory of Wulf and Lewthwaite, enhanced expectancies (EE), autonomy support (AS), and an external focus (EF) of attention facilitate motor performance and learning. The present study examined whether consecutive implementation of EE, AS, and EF during practice would enhance the learning of a square-stepping task in older adults. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to optimized and control groups. After the pretest, 1 of the 3 factors was implemented during each of the three 12-trial practice blocks, in a counterbalanced order, in the optimized group: positive feedback (EE), choice of mat color (AS), and instructions to focus on the squares (EF). Control group participants practiced without any of these factors. RESULTS: Results indicated that the optimized group had faster movement times than the control group during the practice phase and on 24-hr retention and transfer tests. DISCUSSION: The key variables in the OPTIMAL theory can be applied sequentially in order to facilitate motor performance and learning in older adults.

OPTIMAL theory's claims about motivation lack evidence in the motor learning literature.

Motivation is commonly recognized by researchers and practitioners as a key factor for motor learning. The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) claims that practice conditions that enhance learners' expectancies for future successful outcomes or that are autonomy supportive are motivating, thus leading to better learning. To examine the current evidence of the association between motivation and motor learning, we searched the literature for studies that manipulated expectancies and/or autonomy support. Specifically, our goals were to assess whether these manipulations resulted in group differences in motivation and, if so, whether increased motivation was associated with learning advantages. Results showed that out of 166 experiments, only 21% (n = 35) included at least one measure of motivation, even though this is the main factor proposed by OPTIMAL theory to explain the learning benefits of these manipulations. Among those, only 23% (n = 8) found group-level effects on motivation, suggesting that these manipulations might not be as motivating as expected. Of the eight experiments that found a group-level effect on motivation, five also observed learning benefits, offering limited evidence that when practice conditions increase motivation, learning is more likely to occur. Overall, the small number of studies assessing motivation precludes any reliable conclusions on the association between motivation and motor learning from being drawn. Together, our results question whether manipulations implemented in the research lines supporting OPTIMAL theory are indeed motivating and highlight the lack of sufficient evidence in these literatures to support that increased motivation benefits motor learning.

That looks easy! Evidence against the benefits of an easier criterion of success for enhancing motor learning.

OPTIMAL theory predicts providing learners with a relatively easier criterion of success during practice enhances motor learning through increased self-efficacy, perceptions of competence, and intrinsic motivation. However, mixed results in the literature suggest this enhancement effect may be moderated by the number of successes achieved by learners practicing with the difficult criterion. To investigate this possibility, we manipulated quantity of practice to affect the absolute number of successes achieved by learners practicing with different success criteria. Eighty participants were divided into four groups and performed 50 or 100 trials of a mini-shuffleboard task. Groups practiced with either a large or a small zone of success surrounding the target. Learning was assessed 24 h after acquisition with retention and transfer tests. In terms of endpoint accuracy and precision, there were no learning or practice performance benefits of practicing with an easier criterion of success, regardless of the number of trials. This absence of a criterion of success effect was despite the efficacy of our manipulation in increasing the number of trials stopping within the zone of success, self-efficacy, perceptions of competence, and, for participants with 100 trials, intrinsic motivation. An equivalence test indicated that the effect of criterion of success was small, if existent. Moreover, at the individual level, intrinsic motivation did not predict posttest or acquisition performance. There were no benefits of easing the criterion of success on pressure, effort, accrual of explicit knowledge, or conscious processing. These data challenge key tenets of OPTIMAL theory and question the efficacy of easing criterion of success for motor learning.

Effects of positive social comparative feedback on motor sequence learning and performance expectancies.

Introduction: Positive social comparative feedback indicates to the learner that they are performing better than others. While this type feedback supports motor skill learning in some tasks, the effect of social comparative feedback on implicit motor sequence learning remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of positive social comparative feedback on the learning of and expectancies for a motor sequence task. Methods: Forty-eight individuals practiced a joystick-based sequence task and were divided into three feedback groups: CONTROL (no performance feedback), RT ONLY (response time only feedback), and RT+POS (response time plus positive social comparison). Participants attended sessions on two consecutive days: Day 1 for repetitive motor practice/skill acquisition and Day 2 for retention testing. Performance related expectancies, like perceived competence, were measured before and after motor practice on Day 1 and at retention on Day 2. Results: While all groups improved with practice, the CONTROL group showed better overall performance/learning (faster response times) compared with the RT ONLY group. Despite similar response times, the RT+POS showed higher peak velocities than the RT ONLY group. Overall, the RT+POS and CONTROL demonstrated increases in perceived competence while the RT ONLY group did not. Discussion: The results of this study suggest that feedback content is an important consideration during motor practice sessions since feedback without context (RT ONLY) may be detrimental to motor sequence learning. The results also suggest that, if providing performance related feedback during practice of a skill that relies on implicit sequence learning processes, comparative context may be necessary for enhancing expectancies and supporting.

Skilled Throwing Performance: A Test of the OPTIMAL Theory.

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning postulates that autonomy support (AS), enhanced expectancies (EE), and an external focus of attention (EF) facilitate improved motor learning and performance. However, its applicability to elite-level throwing athletes has not been investigated by previous literature. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the successive implementation of AS, EE, and EF factors on overhand throwing performance in elite collegiate softball athletes (14.44 ± 2.75 years of softball experience). The secondary purpose was to determine whether self-efficacy beliefs would be augmented by factor manipulation. Twenty-four participants threw softballs at a bullseye target during five blocks. The Baseline test (Block 1) was used to subsequently assign participants to either the OPTIMAL or control group. Three middle blocks (Block 2 to 4) followed with successive factor implementation for the OPTIMAL group and without instruction for the control group. The final block (Block 5) served as the Transfer test, at which time throwing distance was increased. During Blocks 2 to 4, the OPTIMAL group was given the choice between softballs (AS), a liberal definition of successful throwing performance (EE), and instructed to focus on the bullseye (EF). Self-efficacy beliefs were assessed after applying the factors and before all blocks. There were no significant differences between the groups in throwing accuracy or self-efficacy scores across all blocks. The results suggest that the OPTIMAL theory does not augment skilled throwing performance or alter self-efficacy in elite softball throwing, potentially attributed to a natural adoption of EF and previously high self-efficacy.

A test of optimal theory on young adolescents' standing long jump performance and motivation.

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning contends that an external focus of attention (EF), enhanced expectancies (EE), and autonomy support (AS) are key attentional and motivational variables that optimise motor performance. We examined how integrating an EF into EE and AS interventions would impact young adolescents' standing long jump performance and self-efficacy, perceived competence, task effort, task importance and positive affect. Forty-eight participants completed 3 jumps in a baseline, EF (focus on jumping towards the cone), EE-EF (positive social-comparative feedback/high success probability) and AS-EF (self-definition of success) conditions. Both the EF and AS-EF conditions (but not the EE-EF condition) improved jump performance from baseline. The EF, EE-EF and AS-EF conditions improved young adolescents' self-efficacy, perceived competence, task effort and positive affect in comparison to baseline and were predictors of jump performance (as was task importance). However, in the EE-EF condition motivational states improved (from baseline) but this did not translate into performance improvements. The findings show that directing attention to visual external cues both independently and when framed within AS conditions enhanced young adolescents' jump performance and motivation through efficient goal-action coupling. In practice, PE teachers and sports coaches working with young adolescents can support autonomy by allowing self-definition of success using an external cue to enhance effective goal-action coupling, motor performance and motivation.

Maximal force production requires OPTIMAL conditions.

The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies several motivational and attentional factors that draw out latent motor performance capabilities. One implication of the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016) is that standardized motor performance assessments likely do not reflect maximal capabilities unless they are "optimized" with appropriate testing conditions. The present study examined the effects of three key motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (external focus, EF) variables in the OPTIMAL theory on maximum force production. In Experiment 1, a handgrip strength task was used. EE, AS, and EF were implemented, in a counterbalanced order, on consecutive trial blocks in an optimized group. A control group performed all blocks under neutral conditions. While there were no group differences on Block 1 (baseline), the optimized group outperformed the control group on all other blocks. In Experiment 2, participants performed two one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat lift tests, separated by one week. Two groups, an optimized group and control group, had similar 1-RM values on the first test performed under neutral conditions. However, on the second test, a group performing under optimized conditions (EE, AS, EF) showed an increase in 1-RM, while there was no change from the first to the second test for a control group. We argue that standard test conditions may not produce true maximal performance. The findings corroborate the importance of key factors in the OPTIMAL theory and should be applied to ensure accurate strength performance assessment.

Choose your words wisely: Optimizing impacts on standardized performance testing.

BACKGROUND: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning identifies motivational (enhanced expectancies, EE, and autonomy support, AS) and attentional (an external attentional focus, EF) factors that affect motor performance and learning [1]. One implication of this theory is that standardized clinical and laboratory assessments of physical capacity and motor performance that do not incorporate optimizing conditions may underestimate true maximal capabilities. The influence of "optimized" conditions on a clinical-applied test of balance control was examined with healthy participants. Given the motor performance benefits of optimized conditions predicted by the OPTIMAL theory, it was hypothesized that providing participants with information that induced EE, provided them with AS, and promoted their use of EF would reduce balance errors and postural sway. METHODS: We used as an exemplar assessment, the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), and center-of-pressure (COP) velocity measurements of postural sway. Participants performed under two different conditions, separated by two days: an optimized (EE, AS, and EF) condition and a control ("neutral") condition, with sample-wide order counterbalancing. In each condition, participants performed three stances (double-leg, single-leg, and tandem) on two support surfaces (firm and foam). Stance order was participant-determined in the optimized condition and, for the control condition, yoked to a participant in the optimized condition. RESULTS: Participants committed fewer balance errors in the optimized condition than in the control condition (p < .001) and their resultant COP velocity in the optimized condition was lower than that in the control condition (p = .004). BESS scores were correlated with resultant COP velocity (r = .593, p < .001). SIGNIFICANCE: Our results demonstrated the impact of implementing optimized, as opposed to "neutral" control, conditions for better insight into balance capabilities in normal and challenging situations. Practitioners' roles in mediating test situations and using subtle wording to promote optimized performance may have consequential impacts on motor assessment outcomes.