Cited by 69Sport Psychology and PerformanceMotor Control and AdaptationSports and Physical Education Research

Does self-efficacy mediate transfer effects in the learning of easy and difficult motor skills?

Stevens, David, Anderson, David I., O’Dwyer, Nicholas J., Mark Williams, A.·2012·Consciousness and Cognition

Abstract

The effect of task difficulty on inter-task transfer is a classic issue in motor learning. We examined the relation between self-efficacy and transfer of learning after practicing different versions of a stick balancing task. Practicing the same task or an easier version led to significant pre- to post-test transfer of learning, whereas practicing a more difficult version did not. Self-efficacy increased modestly from pre- to post-test with easy practice, but decreased significantly with difficult practice. In addition, self-efficacy immediately prior to the post-test was significantly lower after difficult practice than easy or intermediate practice. Self-efficacy immediately prior to the post-test, performance at the end of practice, and pre-test performance explained 75% of the variance in post-test performance. The mediating role of self-efficacy on transfer of learning offers an alternative explanation for recent findings on the superiority of easy-to-difficult transfer and may help clarify inconsistencies in earlier research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.concog.2012.03.014

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Self-efficacy arising from success experiences during motor task practice predicts performance on later tests of motor learning.

    “importantly, self-efficacy resulting from success experiences during the practice of a motor task is predictive of performance on subsequent tests of motor learning (Pascua, Wulf, & Lewthwaite, 2015;Stevens, Anderson, O'Dwyer, & Williams, 2012;Wulf, Chiviacowsy, & Cardozo, 2014) or performance (Rosenqvist & Skans, 2015).”

    From Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (2016) · cites this paper as Stevens, Anderson, O'Dwyer, & Williams, 2012

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 69

Authors
Stevens, D., Anderson, D. I., O’Dwyer, N. J., & Mark Williams, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • San Francisco State University (US)
Corresponding author
Stevens, David
Venue
Consciousness and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
1122-1128
ISSN
1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977971147
Cited by
69
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2012: 1
FWCI
10.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
Keywords
self-efficacy, transfer of learning, task difficulty, motor skill learning, mediation
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Motor Skills, Transfer, Psychology, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review