Children’s Motor Skill Learning is Influenced by Their Conceptions of Ability
Abstract
The present study investigated the effects of different ability conceptions on motor skills learning in 6-, 10-, and 14-year-old children. In each age group, different groups were given either inherent-ability or acquirable-skill instructions before they began practicing a throwing task. Participants were blindfolded and were asked to throw beanbags at a target placed on the floor at a distance of 3 m. All participants performed 40 practice trials and received feedback about the accuracy of their throws after each trial. One day after practice, retention and transfer (greater target distance) tests without instructions or feedback were conducted to assess learning effects. Older participants generally had higher accuracy scores than younger participants. Importantly, instructions emphasizing the learnability of the skill resulted in greater throwing accuracy on the retention test than did those implying an underlying inherent ability. On the transfer test, the same effect was seen for the 14-year-olds, but not for the younger age groups, suggesting that adolescents may be more vulnerable to the threat of their inherent ability being exposed. The present findings demonstrate the importance of ability conceptions for motor learning in children and adolescents. They also add to the mounting evidence of motivational influences on motor skill learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In 6-, 10-, and 14-year-old children, instructions suggesting inherent ability before practice led to less effective learning of a throwing task than instructions framing performance as a function of practice.
“Children of all age groups showed less effective learning of a throwing task when the instructions given before the practice phase suggested that performance was a reflection of an inherent ability rather a function of practice.”
From Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (2016) · cites this paper as Drews et al., 2013
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 31
- Authors
- Drews, R., Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G.
- Venue
- Journal of Motor Learning and Development
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 38-44
- ISSN
- 2325-3193 (ISSN-L)
- 2325-3215
- OpenAlex
- W2141715773
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 4.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Motor Learning and Development (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Keywords
- motor skill learning, children, adolescents, throwing accuracy, skill retention, transfer of learning, age differences, motivation
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