The DOI matches its Crossref record; 202 of the 213 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 179 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning
Open accessAbstract
We review research related to the learning of complex motor skills with respect to principles developed on the basis of simple skill learning. Although some factors seem to have opposite effects on the learning of simple and of complex skills, other factors appear to be relevant mainly for the learning of more complex skills. We interpret these apparently contradictory findings as suggesting that situations with low processing demands benefit from practice conditions that increase the load and challenge the performer, whereas practice conditions that result in extremely high load should benefit from conditions that reduce the load to more manageable levels. The findings reviewed here call into question the generalizability of results from studies using simple laboratory tasks to the learning of complex motor skills. They also demonstrate the need to use more complex skills in motor-learning research in order to gain further insights into the learning process.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review argues that motor-learning principles established with simple laboratory tasks often fail to transfer to complex skills. It proposes that low-demand tasks benefit from practice conditions that add challenge, whereas high-demand tasks benefit from conditions that reduce load.
Key findings
- Contextual interference effects are robust for simple tasks, but complex-skill studies are mixed: random practice sometimes helps, yet blocked practice is often better for novices or high-demand tasks. For example, Albaret and Thon found random practice best for the simplest drawing task, with the advantage shrinking and reversing as segments increased.
- Feedback effects differ by complexity: reducing feedback frequency usually helps simple skills, but complex tasks can benefit from more frequent feedback. On the ski simulator, 100% feedback produced later relative force onsets in retention than 50% or no feedback; in summary-feedback studies, optimal summary length was 5 trials for a complex simulated batting task versus 15–20 trials in simpler tasks.
- Feedback organization also differs: blocked feedback about one task component at a time improved complex ski-simulator learning relative to serial feedback, even after 4 days of practice, opposite to simple-task findings favoring random or serial schedules.
- Physical assistance and observational practice can help complex learning: ski poles improved later force onset and transferred to no-pole retention, while replacing 50% of physical practice with observation preserved retention and improved transfer; dyad training increased efficiency by at least 100% without sacrificing learning.
- Attentional focus matters mainly for complex skills: external focus instructions or feedback generally enhanced learning relative to internal focus, and in one study 16 participants chose an external focus versus 4 who chose an internal focus.
Methods
- Narrative review and theoretical synthesis, not a new empirical study.
- The authors contrast simple tasks (often one degree of freedom, mastered in one session, artificial) with complex tasks (multiple degrees of freedom, not mastered in one session, often ecologically valid).
- They review studies on contextual interference, feedback frequency and organization, physical guidance/assistance, attentional focus, and observational learning, using tasks such as barrier knockdown, ski simulator, stabilometer, bimanual coordination, and sport skills.
Limitations
- Stated: task complexity is multidimensional and difficult or impossible to quantify on a single continuum; the authors rely on qualitative judgments to classify tasks as simple or complex.
- Stated: research using complex motor skills is still relatively sparse, and some complex-skill findings, especially for contextual interference, are mixed or limited.
- Evident: as a narrative review, it does not use systematic search or meta-analytic synthesis; some cited evidence includes unpublished data and studies with small or specific samples, and the conclusions depend on selected comparisons across different tasks and paradigms.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
70 No full text of the sources · 68 Own interpretation · 28 Sources not found · 14 Not checked yet · 7 No basis given · 4 Partly supported · 2 Own result · accuracy not yet measured
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the CI effect has proven to be a fairly robust phenomenon, at least for the learning of simple skills in laboratory situations.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These findings also challenge the assumption that a complete understandingof motor-learning processes can be gained by using simple laboratory-type tasks”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Adams, 1971 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning”
- Also stated in: § Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas · hedged
“The findings reviewed here call into question the generalizabilityof results from studies using simple laboratory tasks to the learning of complex motor skills.”
- Also stated in: § Cognitive Effort and Information-Processing Demands · hedged
“indicating that at least some of the principles that have been found for the acquisition of simple skills do not generalize very well to the learning of more complex skills.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas · hedged
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the development of a movement representationfor a more complex skill that requires the coordinationof many degrees of freedom and may initially be stored as a series of relatively independent subcomponents typically takes considerably longer and inherently requires more effort and informationprocessing activities on the part of the learner.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although some factors seem to have opposite effects on the learning of simple and of complex skills”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“no one continuum is satisfactory in quantifying the complexity of the wide variety of motor tasks that have been investigated.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“other factors appear to be relevant mainly for the learning of more complex skills.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“a ski simulator task, for example, that requires several days of practice to develop moderate levels of skill is initially more complex than typical barrier-knockdown tasks or sequential keypress tasks in which performance asymptotes are sometimes achieved in as little as 54 trials”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“when the relative timing pattern required is greatly simplified by making the segment requirements equal across the task (Wright & Shea, 2001), the advantages of blocked, relative to random, practice on relative timing learning are lost.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wright & Shea, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Overall, the studies in which the effects of feedback frequency (Wulf, Shea, & Matschiner, 1998) and feedback organization (Wulf & Bühner, 1996;Wulf, Hörger, & Shea, 1999) on the learning of a complex task, such as the ski simulator task, were examined demonstrate that the findings derived from simple-task learning studies do not generalize very well to complex skill learning.”
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
- Rests on an assumption: Task complexity is a well-defined property that distinguishes simple laboratory tasks from complex motor skills.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 39
- It may state two separate claims as one. 57
- Not yet classified. 21
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Lower levels in an action's identity structure refer to the details of the action, such as the specific movements (e.g., striking the correct keys on a piano), whereas higher levels are more related to the effects of the action (e.g., playing the melody).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1987 source
The “Levels of Identification” section (p. 2) says lower-level identities convey the details of how an action is done, while higher-level identities indicate why it is done or what its effects are. It also describes lower levels as more movement-defined, supporting the citing sentence’s distinction. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In their action identification theory, Vallacher and Wegner proposed a hierarchical order of action identities that are used in the control of action.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1987 source
The Levels of Identification section (p. 2) explicitly describes an action’s identity structure as a hierarchical arrangement of identities. The opening summary (p. 1) and Summary and Conclusions (p. 11) connect levels of identification to maintaining and controlling action. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If the performer selects too low a level of action control-for example, because of pressure to perform well-performance is often disrupted.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1987 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Performance Impairment section (p. 7) says that controlling an easy or familiar action at too low a level can disrupt it. It does not say disruption occurs often; it also describes pressure to perform well as emphasizing higher-level meanings, rather than as an example of selecting too low a level. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“They argued that if lower and higher levels of action identity are available, higher level identities become prepotent.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Vallacher & Wegner, 1987 source
The Theoretical Principles section (p. 3) states this as the theory’s second principle: when both lower- and higher-level act identities are available, the higher-level identity tends to become prepotent. The citing sentence accurately paraphrases that principle. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“random practice is usu-ally more effective than blocked practice when it comes to the learning of simple skills, for which the memory demands are relatively low, and/or when participants are experienced to the extent that they have functionally reduced the demands on memory”
- Also stated in: § Contextual Interference · hedged
“For the learning of more complex skills for which memory and processing demands are high, blocked practice might be more effective, at least early in the learning process.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Contextual Interference · hedged
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is conceivable that introducing additional demands for the learner during this process is actually detrimental, rather than beneficial, because the additional demands compete with the essential processing activities for a limited amount of processing capacity during the learning process.”
Not yet classified.
- Rests on an assumption: Learners have a limited amount of processing capacity.
In the paper
“J. B. Shea and Morgan (1979) were the first to demonstrate the CI effect for motor skill learning.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites J. B. Shea & Morgan, 1979 source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“functional task complexity changes as a result of expertise.”
- Also stated in: § THEORETICAL AND REVIEW ARTICLES · plain
“as an individual performer develops expertise with a task, the functional complexity of the task decreases.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § THEORETICAL AND REVIEW ARTICLES · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“One study that found benefits of high-CI practice for the learning of a sport skill is a study by Smith and Davies (1995), who used the Pawlata kayak roll.”
- Also stated in: § Contextual Interference
“Wrisberg and colleagues (Wrisberg, 1991;Wrisberg & Liu, 1991) have found additional convincing evidence for the greater effectiveness of practice conditions that included frequent changes between tasks.In both studies, alternating different serves produced more effective learning than did blocked practice.”
What the sources say
Not yet classified.
- Also stated in: § Contextual Interference
In the paper
“because a random practice order of different tasks exercises retrieval processes that later facilitate test performanceand therefore requires more effort than does blocked practice-performance at the time of the test is usually enhanced”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Magill & Hall, 1990 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Since the J. B. Shea and Morgan (1979) study, the learning advantages of random, as compared with blocked, practice have been replicated in numerous laboratory experiments.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites J. B. Shea & Morgan, 1979 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“situations with low processing demands benefit from practice conditions that increase the load and challenge the performer, whereas practice conditions that result in extremely high load should benefit from conditions that reduce the load to more manageable levels.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“complex skill learning might be enhanced by providing the learner with practice conditions that facilitate performance (at least until a relatively stable movement presentation is acquired).”
Not yet classified.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For relatively simple skills, a rough movement representation may be developed within a few practice trials, and it is easy to see that a further refinement of the skill is dependent on the extent to which the learner is challenged by the practice conditions.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, however, the tasks used to examine the effects of these variables on learning have been relatively simpleoften including only one degree of freedom, requiring comparatively small amounts of practice to reach performance asymptotes, and placing relatively modest demands on attention,memory, and/or processing capacity.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“making augmented feedback difficult to use-for example, by delaying it or by withholdingit on some practice trials-has been argued to be beneficial for test performance because it forces learners to develop their own internal error-correction-and-detection mechanisms”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schmidt, 1991a source
Not yet classified.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“practice conditions that promote additional cognitive effort (Lee, Swinnen, & Serrien, 1994) or require the learner to engage in additionalinformation-processing activities that are critical for test performance (Schmidt & Bjork, 1992) are most effective for learning.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is also possible that complex skills are sensitive to variables that are not particularly relevant for simple skills.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“whereas the CI effect has been demonstrated fairly consistently for relatively simple laboratory tasks, this does not seem to be the case for more complex skills.”
Not yet classified.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“delaying the feedback for a few seconds has been found to produce more effective learning than does giving feedback immediately after or even concurrently with the movement”
What the sources say
Not yet classified.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“a number of recent experiments (e.g., Lai & Shea, 1998, 1999;Lai, Shea, Wulf, & Wright, 2000;C. H. Shea, Lai, Wright, Immink, & Black, 2001;Whitacre & Shea, 2000) consistently found relative timing advantages for constant and blocked practice, relative to serial and random practice, directly opposite the typical CI effect.”
What the sources say
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“partial reinforcement has been shown to slow acquisition but also to maintain learning for much longer than continuous reinforcement does.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tarpy, 1982
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Wright, Li, and Whitacre (1992; also see Lee, Wishart, Cunningham, & Carnahan, 1997) found that additional processing disrupted learning under random-practice conditions but had positive effects under blocked conditions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wright, Li, & Whitacre, 1992 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“one set of findings that argues against such an explanation for human learning is that beneficial learning effects of reduced feedback are seen not only in no-feedback retention tests, but also in 100% feedback retention tests.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Thus, contrary to studies that used more simple tasks in which reducing the relative feedback frequency was more beneficial for learning than was providing learners with feedback after or during every practice trial (e.g., Schmidt & Wulf, 1997;Winstein & Schmidt, 1990;Wulf & Schmidt, 1989;Wulf et al., 1993), the learning of this more complex task was enhanced by 100% feedback.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
In the paper
“Furthermore, only the 100% group was significantly more effective than the control group, whereas the 50% group did not differ significantly from either group.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Shea, & Matschiner (1998) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Schmidt, Lange, and Young (1990) showed that the optimal number of summary trials for a more complex simulated batting task was lower than those found for more simple tasks.In this case, a summary of 5 trials was more beneficial than longer (15) or shorter (1) feedback summaries.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schmidt, Lange, and Young (1990) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that although the principles underlying animal reinforcement and feedback in humans have some similarities, they show some important differences as well.”
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“Interestingly, this advantage occurred even though the feedback given in the Wulf, Shea, and Matschiner (1998) study was continuous and concurrent.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Shea, and Matschiner (1998) source
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“complex tasks, presumably requiring considerably more memory capacity per task, may exceed the capacity of the performer.This may be especially true early in practice, where a single complex task may be initially stored as a series of subcomponents”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Povel & Collard, 1982 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although the learning of simple skills seems to benefit from reducing or delaying the augmented feedback (although this effect appears to be stronger for variable practice conditions; see Lai & Shea, 1998)”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lai & Shea, 1998 source
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“However, the group that had received the most feedback (100%) during practice showed a clear performance improvement across trials, whereas the 50% feedback group showed no such performance gains, and the control group even demonstrated a performance decrement.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Shea, & Matschiner (1998) source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“whereas relatively long feedback summaries benefited the learning of a relatively simple striking task for both novice and experienced participants, as well as the learning of a more complex double-striking task for experienced participants, single-trial feedback was more effective than longer feedback summaries for novices trying to learn a complex task.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli et al. (1996) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Rather, it seems that the participants in the 100% feedback group developed a more effective error-detection-and-correction mechanism (e.g., Salmoni et al., 1984;Schmidt, 1991a), as compared with the 50% feedback and no-feedback (control) conditions, which enabled them to demonstrate further performance improvements even in the absence of feedback.”
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“immediate reinforcement is more effective than delayed reinforcement in animal learning, but this is not the case for skill learning in humans.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In this experiment, the beneficial effects of blocked practice were seen in amplitude, whereas there were no significant group differences in force onset (even though feedback was given about force onset, as in Wulf & Bühner, 1996)”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Hörger, and Shea (1999) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“concurrent feedback typically has strong performance-enhancing effects during practice, but results in clear performance decrements, relative to postresponse feedback, when it is withdrawn in retention or transfer tests”
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it seems to have clear benefits for more complex skills.”
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A number of studies have demonstrated that the performer's focus of attention can have a decisive influence on performance and learning.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That is, the negative effects thought to be associated with the guidance provided by frequent feedback seem to be reduced.”
Not yet classified.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For complex movements with many degrees of freedom, such as those encountered in many sports situations, there might actually be advantages to using physical assistance procedures, corroborating the view that complex skill learning benefits from reducing the demands imposed on the learner.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
- Rests on an assumption: Task complexity is a well-defined property that distinguishes simple laboratory tasks from complex motor skills.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the benefits in force onset provided by the poles during practice were not only temporary effects.Rather, these benefits transferred to a situation in which no poles could be used, and they were relatively permanent in nature; that is, the poles enhanced the learning of a more efficient movement pattern, relative to practice without poles.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“some principles or phenomena that could be relevant for the learning of complex skills might be less powerful or might not show up in tasks such as those typically used in the laboratory.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“It is conceivable that physical assistance is conducive to learning to the extent that it allows the learner to explore the”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Newell, 1991 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Wulf and Weigelt found that the instructions did not enhance the learning of this task; rather, they were detrimental to performance during practice and transfer to a”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf & Weigelt, 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One characteristic of complex motor skills that is difficult to simulate with simple tasks is that the performer can direct his or her attention to various aspects of the task.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the ski simulator, the poles might have enabled learners to experience (consciouslyor unconsciously) that it is more effective to shift the weight from the outer to the inner foot relatively late-that is, to delay the force onset of the inner foot.This experience provided by the poles served to shorten the learning process and enabled the learners to reach a given level of performance in less”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The results indicated that the latter condition was much more effective for the production of large movement amplitudes than was the internal focus condition in both practice and retention, which was not different from a control condition without additional instructions”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Höß, & Prinz, 1998 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Todorov et al. argued that the highest level of motor planning and control seems to be in terms of the kinematics of the endeffector and that, therefore, the feedback given to the learner should be most effective if it represents the movements of the end-effector, rather than the body movements.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov, Shadmehr, & Bizzi, 1997 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“A considerably greater number of participants chose to focus on the markers that were located in front of their feet (n = 16), rather than on the feet themselves (n = 4).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Shea, & Park, 2001 source
plaincorrelationaln = 16- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It should also be noted, however, that feedback in complex tasks is generally not as prescriptive as it often is in many of the simple tasks that have been used in this context.In complex tasks, there are often different components that have to be coordinated to produce skilled performance, making it much more difficult for a single feedback measure to be truly prescriptive.”
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“Furthermore, this advantage in the movement outcome was not accomplished at the expense of movement form.As was determined through expert ratings, both types of feedback led to similar improvements in form.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wulf et al., in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results again suggest that there may be limitations to the generalizabilityof findings from studies using typical laboratory tasks with few degrees of freedom.”
Not yet classified.
- Rests on an assumption: The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
- Rests on an assumption: Task complexity is a well-defined property that distinguishes simple laboratory tasks from complex motor skills.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“As Schmidt (1988Schmidt ( , 1991b;;Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000) points out, the benefits of (physical) guidance seem to be mainly temporary in nature.Guidance often has strong performance-enhancing effects during practice, when it is present; yet when it is withdrawn in retention or transfer tests, performance is often less effective than that of learners who practiced the task without or with less”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schmidt, 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schmidt, 1991b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In that experiment, the learning of the stabilometer task was also enhanced by an external focus of attention (markers attached to the board in front of each foot), relative to an internal attentional focus (feet).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Höß, & Prinz, 1998 source
Not yet classified.
In the paper
“More important, though, when the poles were removed in retention, the group that had practiced with the poles showed no performance decrements in amplitude or force onset.Both groups had very similar amplitudes in the delayed retention test, and even more interesting, the pole group demonstrated superior learning with regard to relative force onset.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Shea, & Whitacre (1998) source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, these results suggest that whereas the learning of simple tasks might be enhanced by making practice more”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
- Rests on an assumption: Task complexity is a well-defined property that distinguishes simple laboratory tasks from complex motor skills.
In the paper
“The results demonstrated that learning was more effective not only when performers were given external-focus instructions, relative to internal-focus instructions, but also when they were provided”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea & Wulf, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Here again, the external-focus instructions greatly enhanced the accuracy of the shots in practice and in delayed retention, as compared with the internal-focus instructions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, Lauterbach, & Toole, 1999 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They found that a nonawareness strategy and the so-called fivestep approach, in which performers were instructed to focus on a situational cue (e.g., the center of the target), resulted in more effective practice performance and (immediate) dual-task transfer than did an awareness strategy, in which learners were to focus on their own movements.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Singer, Lidor, & Cauraugh, 1993 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“although the movement form in the novice group was degraded by internalfocus feedback during practice, this group caught up with the external-focus group in the retention test, where the feedback was withdrawn.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wulf et al., in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“these findings seem to suggest that feedback can have the capacity to induce an external focus of attention, independent of attentional focus instructions, that benefits performance and learning.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is also interesting to note that the withdrawal of the feedback in retention had no detrimental effect on performance.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea & Wulf, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“touching the curtain significantly reduced postural fluctuation,as compared with not touching it, but only when the participants were asked to minimize movements of the curtain resulting from their touch (touchrelevant condition).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Riley, Stoffregen, Grocki, & Turvey, 1999 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the feedback provided to learners in the C. H. Shea and Wulf (1999) study generally enhanced performers' ability to maintain their balance on the stabilometer, relative to no feedback, even though the feedback could have been argued to be redundant with respect to their intrinsic feedback”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea & Wulf, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“As one would expect, the use of poles clearly facilitated performance.That is, the pole group produced larger amplitudes than did the group that practiced without poles throughout the acquisition phase.In addition, the pole group demonstrated later relative force onsets (see Figure 3), indicating that the poles also facilitated the production of a more efficient movement pattern (Wulf, Shea, &”
What the sources say
Not yet classified.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the stabilometer task, on the other hand, the poles might have prevented the performer from exploring the perceptual-motor workspace.For example, because of the additional support provided by the poles, learners were able to keep the stabilometer platform”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, there may be fundamentally more to”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Prinz argued that there is a common representational medium for perception and action.”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“For the most part, observational learning, although generally considered not as effective as physical practice, has been demonstrated to be a viable method of practicing complex motor skills”
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Highfrequency responding has been argued to be a characteristic of a biologicalsystem with more active degrees of freedom, whereas constrained or compromised perceptualmotor systems exhibit lower frequency components”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Newell & Slifkin, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Not yet classified.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Prinz and colleagues (Prinz, 1992(Prinz, , 1997;;Prinz, Aschersleben, Hommel, & Vogt, 1995) and Hommel (1997) have taken up James's and Lotze's ideas that actions are planned and controlled by their intended effects (action effect hypothesis; Prinz, 1997).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Prinz, 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“External-focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did internal-focus participants, indicating reduced attention demands associated with an external focus.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, McNevin, & Shea, 2001 source
Not yet classified.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, it is important to note that, to date, research on focus of attention has been directed only to relatively complex skills.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This issue is illustrated by Burwitz (1975), who found observation beneficial when he used a Bachman ladder task, a relatively complex task, in one experiment and no differences when a pursuit rotor task, a simple task, was used in another experiment.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Burwitz, 1975
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These theorists have argued that because observers do not actually execute the movement and do not process direct sensory information, observers are not as effective as the model, who is physically practicing a skill, in learning to scale the movement sequence.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Scully & Newell, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to Lotze, movements are represented by codes of their perceived effects, and the desired outcome has the power to guide the action so that this outcome is achieved.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lotze, 1852
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Thus, one advantage of focusing attention on a (distant) movement effect seems to be that it allows unconscious processes to control the movements required to achieve this effect, resulting in fast movement adjustments and generally enhanced performance and learning.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites McNevin et al., in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In a similar vein, Gould (1980) suggested that observation was more effective when the informational load of the task was high, which is often the case for complex tasks, than when it was low, which is more typical of simple tasks.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gould, 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Not yet classified.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, even though observational practice might not be as effective as physical practice in training specific task characteristics, because some types of important processing are unique to physical practice and cannot be developed effectively during observation, observational practice is viewed as a viable training method for teaching general characteristics of complex tasks.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, these results are in line with the view that complex skill learning can be enhanced by reducing the attentional and/or motor control demands associated with it.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“William James (1890) already had suggested that actions are controlled more effectively if attention is directed to the (intended) outcome of the action, or its”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites James, 1890
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Todorov et al. showed that the learning of table tennis shots was enhanced by providing performers with concurrent feedback about the trajectory of their paddle (in relation to the paddle trajectory of an expert).Those participants receiving this type of feedback were more accurate in hitting the target than were the participants who were provided verbal feedback (on gross errors) and who hit 50%”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov et al., 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to this view, efferent and afferent codes can be generated and maintained in a commensurate way only at a distant level of representation.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Prinz, 1992 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When the task demands are relatively simple, this may not be important, but when the demands are high and subcomponents must be properly integrated, the influence could be much larger.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, other experiments have shown little or no benefit of observation (e.g., Brown & Messersmith, 1948;Burwitz, 1975;Wright, Li, & Coady, 1994).”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, observers appear to be able to extract information necessary to construct appropriate coordinationpatterns (Schönfelder-Zohdi, 1992;Scully & Newell, 1985;Whiting, 1988) and determine appropriate implementation strategies (Kohl & Shea, 1992).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schönfelder-Zohdi, 1992
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Scully & Newell, 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Whiting, 1988 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to this hypothesis, performers focusing on their body movement, or on an effect that occurs in close proximity to their body, tend to actively intervene in the control of their movements.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites McNevin et al., in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Not yet classified.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This led Burwitz to conclude that the benefits of observation were mediated by task difficulty.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Burwitz, 1975
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Not yet classified.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The issue of learning efficiency, although relevant to the study of both simple and complex skill learning, is especially important for complex skills, because these skills generally take longer to learn, often are more physically demanding, in many cases introduce the potential for more risk, and generally require more specialized equipment or facilities than do simple skills.”
Not yet classified.
- Rests on an assumption: Complex skills generally take longer to learn, are more physically demanding, carry more risk, and require more specialized equipment or facilities than simple skills.
In the paper
“Both feedback and an external focus of attention enhanced learning of the stabilometer task.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea and Wulf (1999)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings demonstrate that alternating observational practice with physical practice trials can be quite effective, presumably because the interspersed observational trials give learners the opportunity to perform information-processing activities that they would not be able to do while performing a complex, highly attention-demanding skill.”
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In the experiments by Shebilske et al. (1992) and C. H. Shea et al. (2000), doubling the number of participants trained without an increase in time and other resources led to increases in training efficiency of at least 100%, while not sacrificing, and even enhancing, learning effectiveness.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Providing learners with observational practice during rest intervals-for example, by having them watch a partner perform-would enhance training efficiency, since two (or more) learners could be trained in the same amount of time as one.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Furthermore, random practice, which has often been shown to enhance motor learning when simple tasks were used, does not seem to be beneficial for the learning of more complex tasks (or for inexperienced learners); rather, blocked practice can result in more effective learning in these cases (e.g., Albaret & Thon, 1999;Hebert et al., 1996;J. B. Shea & Morgan, 1979).”
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Until these boundary conditions are determined, valid principles and, thus, comprehensive theories cannot be developed.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If physical and observational practice offer unique opportunities for processing that may independently increment learning, acquisition protocols that combine physical and observational practice should be effective training procedures.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“On test games that required control of the whole task, however, there were no differences between groups-that is, both groups showed the same amount of learning (also see Jordan, 1997, for a meta-analysis).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jordan, 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Simple tasks, on the other hand, for which cognitive demands tend to be much lower, may not benefit as much from the reduced processing loads characteristic of observational practice.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Simple motor tasks tend to have much lower cognitive demands than complex tasks.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is also important to note that combined observation and physical practice protocols have the potential to greatly increase learning efficiency without sacrificing learning effectiveness (C.H. Shea et al., 2000;C. H. Shea et al., 1999).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites C.H. Shea et al., 2000 source
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea et al., 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clearly, from a personal standpoint, observational practice requires the expenditure of less physical energy, reduces the risk of injury, and is not dependent on equipment or specific space requirements, as in the case of physical practice.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Observational practice requires less physical energy, reduces injury risk, and is less dependent on equipment or specific space than physical practice.
In the paper
“Even though there was an initial performance decrement under dyad practice conditions in acquisition, relative to individual practice, the dyad group participants quickly caught up with the individual group participants and even tended to be more effective at the end of the acquisition phase (see Figure 6).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea et al., 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The results showed that practice with a partner was more effective than individual practice.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. H. Shea et al., 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We do believe, however, that the inclusion of more complex and ecologically valid tasks in our research would further enhance our understanding of learning.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, since complex skills are generally more attention demanding, the beneficial effects of observational practice should be seen more clearly for complex tasks.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Complex motor skills generally impose higher attention demands than simple motor skills.
The paper relies on this without support.
Learners have a limited amount of processing capacity.
“compete with the essential processing activities for a limited amount of processing capacity during the learning process.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The simple and complex tasks compared across the reviewed studies are sufficiently comparable that differences in findings can be attributed to task complexity rather than to other methodological differences.
“In contrast to the simple laboratory tasks used in many studies, reducing relative feedback frequency did not enhance learning of the ski simulator task.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Task complexity is a well-defined property that distinguishes simple laboratory tasks from complex motor skills.
“Guadagnoli, Dornier, and Tandy (1996) directly demonstrated that task complexity, as well as task-related experience, interacted with the optimal number of trials summarized.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Complex motor skills generally impose higher attention demands than simple motor skills.
“Thus, since complex skills are generally more attention demanding, the beneficial effects of observational practice should be seen more clearly for complex tasks.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Simple motor tasks tend to have much lower cognitive demands than complex tasks.
“Simple tasks, on the other hand, for which cognitive demands tend to be much lower, may not benefit as much from the reduced processing loads characteristic of observational practice.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Complex skills generally take longer to learn, are more physically demanding, carry more risk, and require more specialized equipment or facilities than simple skills.
“because these skills generally take longer to learn, often are more physically demanding, in many cases introduce the potential for more risk, and generally require more specialized equipment or facilities than do simple skills.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Observational practice requires less physical energy, reduces injury risk, and is less dependent on equipment or specific space than physical practice.
“Clearly, from a personal standpoint, observational practice requires the expenditure of less physical energy, reduces the risk of injury, and is not dependent on equipment or specific space requirements, as in the case of physical practice.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Simple skills can be effectively learned with relatively little practice.
“than for simple skills that can be effectively learned with relatively little practice.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Thus, the frequency of feedback should decrease with increasing skill level-that is, with decreasing functional task complexityto further facilitate motor learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004;Timmermans, Seelen, Willmann, & Kingma, 2009;Wulf & Shea, 2002;Wulf, Shea, & Matschiner, 1998).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Especially in very early learning phases, learners seem to benefit from concurrent feedback (Todorov et al., 1997) because it seems to decrease cognitive load (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, one should be careful in transferring conclusions found in studies on simple tasks to complex task learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004;Winstein, 1991;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Applied methods and gained results of related studies have revealed that the impact of augmented feedback depends on task complexity and skill level (Timmermans et al., 2009;Utley & Astill, 2008;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Another reason might be that in an early learning phase, concurrent feedback can prevent cognitive overload and, therefore, enhance learning of complex motor tasks (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Since an external focus was stated to be more beneficial than an internal focus for motor learning (Shea & Wulf, 1999;Wulf, 2007a;Wulf & Shea, 2002;Wulf et al., 2010), feedback should be given about a variable that can force an external focus of attention.”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Up to now, mostly low-dimensional, simple, and rather artificial labor tasks have been investigated even though, in real life, most motor tasks are multidimensional and complex (Winstein, 1991;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Wulf & Shea, 2002
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Wulf and Shea (2002) suggest that”
From The Knowledge‐Learning‐Instruction Framework: Bridging the Science‐Practice Chasm to Enhance Robust Student Learning (2012) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea (2002)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Complex tasks used in applied settings may be too challenging for information processing ( Hebert et al., 1996 ) and deleterious for learning as a result ( Wulf and Shea, 2002 ).”
From The effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning - a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea, 2002
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Several studies have shown important interactions between the effectiveness of training interventions, the participants' skill level, and the complexity of the skill conducted.”
From Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces (2015) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea [2002]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Wulf and Shea [2002] found that principles derived from the study of simple tasks do not generalize to more complex skills.”
From Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces (2015) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea [2002]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“They explained this effect with reference to the learner's total cognitive load: When task demands are low, learners benefit from practice conditions that increase total load, whereas when task demands are high, practice conditions with more manageable workload are beneficial.”
From Supporting Novice to Expert Transitions in User Interfaces (2015) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea [2002]
In the citing paper
“Indeed there are data from other areas of cognitive neuroscience that demonstrate that repeating something that you have successfully learned is the best way to remember it (Chiviacowsky and Wulf, 2007; Karpicke and Roediger, 2008; Wulf and Shea, 2002).”
From Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models (2011) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea, 2002
In the citing paper
“Learning motor skills by observing a model that performs the desired actions and behavior has been a successful and well researched instructional technique for the last 30 years (McCullagh et al. 1989;Wetzel et al. 1994;Wulf and Shea 2002).”
From Interactivity in Video-based Models (2007) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea 2002
In the citing paper
“By alternating between observation and practice, the mental representation will be enriched (Weeks and Anderson 2000;Wulf and Shea 2002).”
From Interactivity in Video-based Models (2007) · cites this paper as Wulf and Shea 2002
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Feedback frequency.
“that is, 4 days of practice with 10 trials per day.”
§ Conclusions
“Figure 2. Movement amplitudes of the blocked and serial feedback (FB) groups on the pretest (Trial 1), during practice (Trials 2, 9, 11, 18, 20, 27, 29, 36), and on the no-feedback retention tests of Day 2 (Trial 10), Day 3 (Trial 19), Day 4 (Trial 28), and Day 5 (Trials 37-41)”
Citations
Cites
James, W. (1891) · Personality Culture Society · doi:10.1037/11059-000 · Cited by 25,876
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.127 · Cited by 7,335
Egeth, H. E., & Kahneman, D. J. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421603 · Cited by 6,976
The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement.
Fitts, P. M. (1954) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0055392 · Cited by 6,466
The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement.
Fitts, P. M. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037//0096-3445.121.3.262 · Cited by 6,296
Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.1.1 · Cited by 5,902
The co-ordination and regulation of movements
Bernshteĭn, N. A. (1969) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(69)90278-9 · Cited by 5,087
Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis
Schmidt, R. A. (1982) · Cited by 4,770
The principles of psychology, Vol I.
James, W. (1890) · doi:10.1037/10538-000 · Cited by 4,514
Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis
Johansson, G. (1973) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03212378 · Cited by 4,441
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Burwitz, L. (1975).Observational learning and motor performance. Paper presented at the FEPSAC Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
- Fitts, P. M., &Posner, M. I. (1967).Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
- Gabriele, T. E., Lee, T. D., &Hall, C. R. (1991). Contextual interference in movement timing: Specific effects in retention and transfer.Journal of Human Movement Studies,20, 177–188.
- Lotze, R. H. (1852).Medicinische Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele (Medical psychology or physiology of the soul). Leipzig: Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung.
- Newell, K. M., &Slifkin, A. B. (1996). The nature of movement variability. In J. Piek (Ed.),Motor control and human skill: A multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 143–159). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
- Pinto-Zipp, G., &Gentile, A. M. (1995). Practice schedules in motor learning: Children vs. adults.Society of Neuroscience: Abstracts,21, 1620.
- Prinz, W., Aschersleben, G., Hommel, B., &Vogt, S. (1995). Handlungen als Ereignisse [Actions as events]. In D. Dörner & E. van der Meer (Eds.),Das Gedächtnis: Probleme—Trends—Perspektiven (pp. 129–168). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
- Schönfelder-Zohdi, B. G. (1992).Investigating the informational nature of a modelled visual demonstration. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 822
Eastwood, C., McCabe, P., & Heard, R. C. (2022) · International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1080/17549507.2022.2079723 · Cited by 5
“…and builds a reference of correctness (i.e. knowing which attempts are correct or incorrect, and why); (b) is motivated to learn; and (c) can accurately produce the task under optimal conditions in a minimal period, with low effort and reduced risk of injury (Maas et al., 2008; Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Robot-Assisted Microsurgery Has a Steeper Learning Curve in Microsurgical Novices
Strübing, F., Weigel, J., Gazyakan, E., Siegwart, L. C., Holup, C., Kneser, U., & Böcker, A. (2025) · Life · doi:10.3390/life15050763 · Cited by 5
“Given the multifactorial nature of skill acquisition—spanning cognitive, motor, and perceptual domains—our findings, while suggestive, cannot definitively isolate causal mechanisms [22,23].”
Little, J. L., & Nepangue, J. A. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15050662 · Cited by 5
“This benefit has been shown in a variety of domains, including the learning of artists’ styles (Kornell & Bjork, 2008), naturalistic stimuli (Wahlheim et al., 2011), math (Rohrer & Taylor, 2007), and simple motor skills (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Dreger, F. A., & Rinkenauer, G. (2023) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2023.104204 · Cited by 5
Kato, Y., Tsuji, T., & Cikajlo, I. (2024) · IEEE Open Journal of Engineering in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1109/ojemb.2024.3363137 · Cited by 4
“This could be due to an increase in cognitive load, as reducing attention demand enhances skill learning [30].”
BackgroundAugmented Sensory Feedback during Training of Upper Extremity Function in Virtual Reality
Shi, Y., Liu, M., Dewil, S., Harel, N. Y., Sanford, S., & Nataraj, R. (2024) · Proceedings - IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems · doi:10.1109/cbms61543.2024.00046 · Cited by 5
Cece, V., Fargier, P., Roure, C., & Lentillon‐Kaestner, V. (2024) · Technology Pedagogy and Education · doi:10.1080/1475939x.2024.2407380 · Cited by 5
“…systems (e.g. feedback on each of the dance steps in the game Just Dance®), which may be particularly helpful for learning, as underlined by educational research (e.g. Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Wisniewski et al., 2020) and by research on motor learning (Robin et al., 2020; Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Carnero-Díaz, Á., Pecci, J., Camacho-Lazarraga, P., & Lluch, Á. C. (2024) · Psychology of Sport And Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102766 · Cited by 7
Belkacemi, Z., van Dokkum, L. E. H., Tchechmedjiev, A., et al. (2025) · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/s12984-025-01611-1 · Cited by 4
“However, finger tapping performance for instance does not necessarily reflect motor impairments under real world conditions [70], in which object manipulation is an important upper-limb function.”
Development and application of a live transmitting player-mounted head camera
Croft, H. G., Suwarganda, E. K., & Omar, S. F. S. (2013) · Sports Technology · doi:10.1080/19346182.2013.816719 · Cited by 4
“Providing video feedback after several repetitions of a trial rather than between every trial gives better retention of learning motor skills (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundFrequency and precision of feedback and the adaptive process of learning a dual motor task
Meira, C. M., Maia, J. A. R., & Tani, G. (2012) · Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte · doi:10.1590/s1807-55092012000300011 · Cited by 5
The Effect of Task Difficulty and Instructions for Focus of Attention on Performing a Balance Task
Moghaddam, A. M. D., & Namazizadeh, M. (2008) · Cited by 4
Frömer, R., Stürmer, B., & Sommer, W. (2016) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.06.010 · Cited by 4
“This might explain why findings from simple tasks do not necessarily generalize to complex tasks (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundInfluentialAdolescents’ Postural Control Learning According to the Frequency of Knowledge of Process
Gandía, J., García‐Massó, X., Marco-Ahulló, A., & Estevan, I. (2019) · Journal of Motor Learning and Development · doi:10.1123/jmld.2017-0042 · Cited by 4
Designing the Next Generation of Activity Trackers for Performance Sports
Havlucu, H., Coşkun, A., & Özcan, O. (2019) · Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3290607.3312945 · Cited by 4
“Confirming their approach, previous research shows that presenting excessive information during attention demanding activities such as tennis, can cause a cognitive overload [12].”
BackgroundEffect of mental calculus on the performance of complex movements
Khayat, J., Champely, S., Diab, A., Sarraj, A. R., & Fargier, P. (2019) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2019.05.008 · Cited by 5
Memories of motor adaptation do not necessarily decay with behavioral unlearning
Yan, C., Chen, Y., Lu, Z., & Li, Z. (2019) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-019-05703-y · Cited by 3
Sex Differences in Maintaining the Requested Handgrip Force Enhanced by Auditory or Visual Feedback
Tarnas, J., Stemplewski, R., & Krutki, P. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17145158 · Cited by 4
Wilkins, E. W., Pantović, M., Noorda, K. J., et al. (2024) · Bioengineering · doi:10.3390/bioengineering11080744 · Cited by 4
“Since motor practice is the primary factor responsible for motor learning, substantial research efforts have been made over many decades to determine the best parameters of motor practice to induce motor learning [3].”
BackgroundThe functional significance of the skilled performance positivity: An update
Masaki, H., Xu, L., Taima, N., & Murphy, T. I. (2015) · International Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.06.007 · Cited by 4
The Effects of observation, dialogue, and attentional focus in dyadic training protocol
Granados, C. (2020) · Digital Scholarship - UNLV (University of Nevada Reno) · doi:10.34917/1438511 · Cited by 4
Al‐Sharman, A., Al-khazaaleh, H. M., Khalil, H. W., Aburub, A. S., & El‐Salem, K. (2021) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzab175 · Cited by 5
Performance Enhancing Mechanisms for Human Manipulation
Klein, J. (2009) · Cited by 4
Age and practice effects on inter-manual performance asymmetry
Francis, K. L., MacRae, P. G., Spirduso, W. W., & Eakin, T. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01585 · Cited by 4
“…(e.g., the portion of involved subsystems or abilities) that a task requires to complete it, or as “a skill that cannot be mastered in a single session, has more than one degree of freedom, and has the potential to be ecologically valid” (Wulf and Shea, 2002; Voelcker-Rehage, 2008, p. 64).”
BackgroundSTUDENTS’ EXPERIENCE ABOUT THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Mosalanejad, L., Parandavar, N., & Rezaie, E. (2014) · Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences · Cited by 4
Evaluating Two Modes of Observational Learning in Cognitive-Spatial Task Training
Gavish, N., & Shelef, M. (2013) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39360-0_25 · Cited by 4
“, [1-3]), and observational learning has been proved to produce good cognitive representations of skilled actions [4-5].”
BackgroundLee, T. D., & Schmidt, R. A. (2008) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-012370509-9.00163-7 · Cited by 5
Building Deep Specialization through Intentional Learning Activities
Ford, J. K., Webb, J. M., & Showler, M. B. (2017) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316091067.012 · Cited by 4
The differentiated effect of the task complexity on retention and transfer of stroke survivors
Palma, G. C. D. S., Corrêa, U. C., & Torriani‐Pasin, C. (2019) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2019.102545 · Cited by 4
Motor learning theory can benefit seafarers
Sanli, E. A. (2024) · Journal of Navigation · doi:10.1017/s0373463324000328 · Cited by 3
“Often, principles developed from studying simple motor skills do not generalise to more complex ones, especially in training course contexts (Wulf and Shea, 2002; Sanli and Carnahan, 2018).”
PullExo: An orthosis-based mobile hand exoskeleton with on-device visual biofeedback
Yassı, İ. E., Ekeer, E., Durmaz, A., Günay, S. M., Özçakır, Ş., & Temel, Ş. G. (2025) · Journal of Hand Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jht.2025.05.002 · Cited by 3
Filho, J. R. D. M. G., Abreu, T. F. D. O., Vieira, Q. R., Bueno, G. R., Freitas, A. D. S., da Silva, J. B., & Bonuzzi, G. M. G. (2025) · Journal of Motor Behavior · doi:10.1080/00222895.2025.2585181 · Cited by 5
“However, we recognize that findings derived from simple tasks may not be directly generalizable to complex motor skills (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Schreiner, V., Backhaus, J., Lindner, M., et al. (2026) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/82136 · Cited by 3
“Similarly, principles derived from the acquisition of simple motor tasks often fail to generalize to complex, context-rich skill environments [27].”
Immersive competence as a source of bias in virtual reality clinical assessment
Schaal, J., Leutritz, T., Lindner, M., Zamzow, A., Backhaus, J., Koenig, S., & Mühling, T. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02482-z · Cited by 6
“Comparable patterns have been documented in studies on internet skills and motor tasks, where general abilities show limited transfer to strategic or context-speci fi c applications 39,40 .”
Task integration in complex, bimanual sequence learning tasks
Beißel, P., & Künzell, S. (2023) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-023-01848-2 · Cited by 3
“We deem this necessary as the findings of studies on simple motor skills cannot simply be generalized for complex motor skills (Wulf & Shea, 2002) and as such, methods should be critically evaluated, too.”
BackgroundInfluentialTasci, S., Çelik, H., & Kirazcı, S. (2024) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2024.103186 · Cited by 3
Toshima, K., Chokki, Y., Wasaka, T., et al. (2025) · IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine · doi:10.1109/jtehm.2025.3540203 · Cited by 3
“In such movements, the mobilization of attentional function required to control and learn the movement may be low [20], [21].”
O’Malley, S., Rajagobal, A., Grundy, J. G., Mohrenschildt, M. V., & Shedden, J. M. (2016) · International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1080/10508414.2017.1295246 · Cited by 3
“This addresses a more basic question regarding how learning progresses (Schroeder & Grant, 2010; Wulf & Shea, 2002), suggesting that critical elements of the task (e.g., joystick control) should first be learned under relatively easy conditions, subsequently increasing in difficulty (e.g., adding…”
BackgroundChanges on movement control of dart throwing under distance and target weight constraints
Campos, C. E., Lage, G. M., de Andrade, A. G. P., Couto, C. R., Santos, S. P., Profeta, V. L. D. S., & Ugrinowitsch, H. (2019) · Journal of Human Sport and Exercise · doi:10.14198/jhse.2019.144.20 · Cited by 4
“However, our results are limited to use motor skills with more complexity (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundCASE STUDY OF PRIMITIVE REFLEXES IMPACT ON SWIMMING SKILL ACQUISITION BY HEALTHY CHILDREN
Bogdanoviča, I., & Lāriņš, V. (2020) · SOCIETY INTEGRATION EDUCATION Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference · doi:10.17770/sie2020vol6.5180 · Cited by 3
“Due to complexity, its usually are learned in parts (Blanksby, Parker, Bradley, & Ong, 1995; Oh et al., 2011) in odere to reduce cognitive load on the early stage in learning (Wulf & Shea, 2002; Magill & Anderson, 2016).”
BackgroundEffects of the aerobic exercise on the learning of a sports motor skill
Bonuzzi, G. M. G., Alves, É. J. M., & Perotti, A. (2020) · Motriz Revista de Educação Física · doi:10.1590/s1980-6574202000011420 · Cited by 3
“…generalize the principles derived from simple tasks (laboratory perceptual-motor tasks) to complex tasks (sports skills and ADL's) according to the Wulf and Shea's critical review 26 Thus, the present study aimed to investigate the effect of aerobic exercise on the learning of a sports motor skill.”
InfluentialShaver, A. A., Peri, N., Mezebish, R., Matthew, G., Berson, A., Gaskins, C., Davis, G. P., Katz, G. E., Samuel, I. B. H., Reinhard, M. J., et al. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-05457-0_28 · Cited by 3
“…(e.g., high-level planning; working memory; attention; [5]); ii) require a substantial amount of practice to be mastered, iii) involve several degrees of freedom while requiring substantial hand-eye coordination, and iv) are a good vehicle to study human behavior in more real-world conditions [6].”
BackgroundBi-Weekly Voice Therapy Versus Weekly Voice Therapy for Muscle Tension Dysphonia
Chang, C.-W., Fu, S., Yu, Y.-H., et al. (2023) · Journal of Voice · doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2023.07.004 · Cited by 3
Jang, E. J., & Kim, K. (2024) · Journal of Robotic Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11701-024-01859-0 · Cited by 3
“This finding aligns with the existing literature emphasizing the role of observational learning, which is the process of passively watching another individual perform a task, playing a crucial role in developing surgical expertise [23], especially when used as a supplement to physical practice [24].”
Benthem, Y., van de Pol, E., Draaisma, J. M., et al. (2018) · Hong Kong Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1177/1024907918806644 · Cited by 3
Spoken voice training research – an Australian perspective
Madill, C. (2011) · Voice and Speech Review · doi:10.1080/23268263.2011.10739552 · Cited by 3
“These principles form a schema that provides insight into the variables that affect the acquisition and retention of a motor skill (Wulf and Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundThe Impact of Immediate Verbal Feedback on Swimming Effectiveness
Zatoń, K., & Szczepan, S. (2013) · Physical Culture and Sport Studies and Research · doi:10.2478/pcssr-2013-0018 · Cited by 3
“The effects of augmented feedback not only depend on its relevance or type, but also on its frequency, precision, volume, and duration (Magill, 1994; Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundControl Over Multiple Forms of Instructional Assistance While Learning the Cascade Juggle
Laughlin, D. D. (2012) · Cited by 3
Impact of instruction on the acquisition of sequence knowledge in a sensorimotor task
Kirsch, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2011) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.05.009 · Cited by 3
“…movements (“internal focus of attention”)may result in less effective skill learning compared with conditions, in which attention is directed to the effects of movements (“external focus” of attention, see e.g., Wulf & Prinz, 2001; Wulf & Shea, 2002; Wulf, Shea, & Lewthwaite, 2010 for reviews).”
BackgroundA framework for understanding the emotional impacts in virtual sport training
Kuo, J.-Y., Chen, C., & Roberts, J. R. (2013) · Virtual and Physical Prototyping · doi:10.1080/17452759.2013.862957 · Cited by 3
“In addition, if the movement is more complex, it would require other learning principles (Wulf and Shea 2002).”
BackgroundConstant-blocked practice: variation of parameters improves motor skill acquisition
Matos, C. D. O., Vieira, M. M., Santos, B. R., Lage, G. M., & Ugrinowitsch, H. (2017) · Motriz Revista de Educação Física · doi:10.1590/s1980-6574201700030026 · Cited by 3
“No differences between groups (F(1,18) = 0.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe effect of verbal feedback on biomechanical performance during swimming ergometry
Zatoń, K., Cześniewicz, I., & Szczepan, S. (2018) · Human Movement · doi:10.5114/hm.2018.73606 · Cited by 3
Transfer of Training from Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality: A Meta-Analysis Extended Abstract
Kaplan, A. D., Cruit, J. K., Endsley, M. R., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181319631207 · Cited by 3
The effects of practice schedules on the process of motor adaptation.
Gill, S. V., Pu, X., Woo, N., & Kim, D. (2018) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 3
Mizuguchi, N., Tsuchimoto, S., Fujii, H., Kato, K., Nagami, T., & Kanosue, K. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96381-w · Cited by 4
Veldkamp, R., Moumdjian, L., van Dun, K., Six, J., Vanbeylen, A., Kos, D., & Feys, P. (2021) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.14702 · Cited by 3
Development of a novel biofeedback system for the sprint start
Gutierrez, J. C., Walton, S. P., & Bezodis, N. E. (2022) · International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · doi:10.1177/17479541211072729 · Cited by 3
AVERAGE-KR SCHEDULE BENEFITS GENERALIZED MOTOR PROGRAM LEARNING
Yao, W. X. (2003) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.2466/pms.97.5.185-191 · Cited by 3
The Positive Effects on Volleyball Receiving Skills When Training with Lighter Balls
Lin, K.-C., Chang, C.-Y., Hung, M.-H., & Lin, W.-M. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12199692 · Cited by 3
Training complex judgment : the effects of critical thinking and contextual interference
Helsdingen, A. S. (2008) · DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) · Cited by 2
Interdisciplinarity of Foreign Languages Education Design and Management in COVID-19
Махачашвілі, Р. К., Semenist, I., & Moskalov, D. P. (2022) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-7527-0_18 · Cited by 2
Transitioning from Presenter to Facilitator
Wan, M. (2013) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b16069-20 · Cited by 2
Cienfuegos, M., Naceri, A., Maycock, J., Kõiva, R., Ritter, H. J., & Schack, T. (2024) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1425090 · Cited by 2
“Understanding the importance of tactile feedback in motor learning can inform the development of more effective training interventions (Wulf and Shea, 2002; Krakauer and Mazzoni, 2011), and help tailor motor learning strategies to the specific needs of individuals.”
BackgroundReactive AI feedback Improves task performance over time
Berry, J. H. (2025) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2025.101361 · Cited by 4
Mehta, A., Smith, J., Travieso, D., & Bongers, R. M. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-20895-w · Cited by 2
“Practice schedule effects on performance outcomes do not find strong support in complex discrete tasks requiring de-novo learning 40,41 .”
Aune, T. K., Aune, M. A., Estensen, V., & Lorås, H. W. (2026) · European Journal of Sport Science · doi:10.1002/ejsc.70130 · Cited by 2
“…balance training enhances performance in the tasks that are directly practiced while exerting minimal or no effect on untrained tasks (e.g., Bakker et al. 2021; Donath et al. 2013, 2016; Giboin et al. 2015, 2019; Norman et al. 2012; Ringhof and Stein 2018; Rizzato et al. 2025; Wulf and Shea 2002).”
Ringsted, C. V., Hodges, B. D., & Scherpbier, A. J. J. A. (2013) · Pédagogie médicale · doi:10.1051/pmed/2012029 · Cited by 2
Graham, C. S., Stephens, D. M., Dietz, K. C., & Winter, S. L. (2016) · International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation · doi:10.12968/ijtr.2016.23.5.215 · Cited by 2
“Wulf and Shea (2002) describe a motor task as complex if it has several degrees of freedom, is ecologically valid and cannot be mastered in a single session.”
BackgroundTactowel: A Subtle Sports Performance Display for Giving Real-Time Performance Feedback in Tennis
Havlucu, H., Coşkun, A., & Özcan, O. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21134594 · Cited by 2
“On the other hand, providing such performance metrics in real-time is troublesome [1,7,12,13].”
BackgroundThe role of nocturnal sleep on the retention, adaptability, and relearning rate of a motor skill
Sousa, F. Y. M., Silva, Y. D. M. R. E., Santos, A. K. D. S., Palma, G. C. D. S., Lemos, R. L. F., & Bonuzzi, G. M. G. (2022) · Motriz Revista de Educação Física · doi:10.1590/s1980-657420220017221 · Cited by 2
“Given that, the principles created by simple task studies are not generalized to complex motor skills 21 , such as sports skills and activities of daily living.”
Sensory-Motor Interactions and the Manipulation of Movement Error
Parmar, P. N., Huang, F. C., & Patton, J. L. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08995-4_11 · Cited by 2
Aniszewska-Stępień, A., Hérault, R., Hacques, G., Seifert, L., & Gasso, G. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.961435 · Cited by 2
Cognitive-motor performance assessment during in-person and remote practice of action sequences
Shaver, A. A., Lu, C. M., Gaskins, C., et al. (2023) · International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering · doi:10.1109/ner52421.2023.10123908 · Cited by 2
“, highlevel planning; working memory; attention; [7]); ii) require a lot of practice to be learned, iii) requiring substantial handeye coordination, implying multiple degrees of freedom, and iv) allow for examination of human behavior in realistic situations [8].”
BackgroundGisbert-Orozco, J. F., Moras, G., Illera-Domínguez, V., Toro-Román, V., Buxadé, C. P.-C., & Fernández-Valdés, B. (2024) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app14041481 · Cited by 2
Jayashankar, J., Packy, A. L., Teymourlouei, A., et al. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-61569-6_10 · Cited by 2
A kinematically complex multi-articular motor skill for investigating implicit motor learning
Solomon, J. P., Hurst, A., Kraeutner, S. N., et al. (2024) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-024-01987-0 · Cited by 2
“…of the motor component of the skill being learned and additional reliance on perceptual learning (i.e., improved recognition of the stimulus and the resulting mapping of perceptual cues to movement goals) compared to other complex motor tasks (Schwarb & Schumacher, 2012; Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Acquiring an Accurate Mental Model of Human Learning
Pan, S. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190917982.013.69 · Cited by 2
Lola, A. C., Dalamitros, A. A., Zafeiroudi, A., Eradli, N., Clemente‐Suárez, V. J., & Martín-Rodríguez, A. (2024) · Children · doi:10.3390/children11121560 · Cited by 4
Motor Learning in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review
Tomlin, K. B., Akinlosotu, R. Y., Gorman, E. F., et al. (2025) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-025-09661-x · Cited by 2
“Complex motor skills have been defined as those that cannot be mastered in a single session, have several degrees of freedom, and are ecologically valid (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
Variant Target Effects on Motor Learning With M1 Anodal tDCS
Perez, J., McCallion, Q., Poston, B., & Riley, Z. A. (2025) · Brain and Behavior · doi:10.1002/brb3.70743 · Cited by 2
“…though whole body, multi-joint coordination tasks are more transferrable to real-world applications than a simple task (Cordo and Gurfinkel 2004; Wulf and Shea 2002), experimental procedures may be unrepresentative of activities of daily living, hobbies, or sports that are not repeatable in…”
Imani, H., & Godde, B. (2025) · Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1027/0269-8803/a000349 · Cited by 2
Therapeutische Methoden und Interventionen
Binkofski, F., Dafotakis, M., Dohle, C., Eickhof, C., Ertelt, D., Grefkes, C., Hamzei, F., Hauptmann, B., Hesse, S., Horst, R., et al. (2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17257-1_7 · Cited by 2
Doctors' communication of trust, care, and respect
Jones, J. E., & Willis, D. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7451.1318-a · Cited by 2
Circles on pommel horse with a suspended aid: Mass-centre rotation and hip joint moment
Fujihara, T., & Gervais, P. (2012) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2012.695078 · Cited by 2
“Wulf and Shea ( 2002 ) asserted that the results based on simple laboratory tasks could not be generalised to motor learning on more complicated tasks.”
BackgroundDicas de aprendizagem auxiliam as crianças com TDC na aquisição de uma habilidade motora complexa?
Medina-Papst, J., Ladewig, I., Rodacki, A. L. F., & Marques, I. (2012) · Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte · doi:10.1590/s0101-32892012000200016 · Cited by 2
L'évolution des coordinations lors de l'apprentissage d'habiletés motrices complexes
Teulier, C., & Nourrit-Lucas, D. (2008) · Science & Motricité · doi:10.3917/sm.064.0035 · Cited by 2
Adaptability from Contextual Interference in the Learning of an Open Skill is Context Dependent
Babo, A. G. F., Neto, R. M. A., & Teixeira, L. A. (2008) · The Open Sports Medicine Journal · doi:10.2174/1874387000802010056 · Cited by 2
“From the results, we provided somewhat contradictory findings to the proposition that low rather than high contextual interference would be more appropriate for beginners in complex motor tasks [11-13].”
BackgroundResultSanli, E. A., Slauenwhite, J., & Carnahan, H. (2017) · Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science · doi:10.1080/1463922x.2016.1269845 · Cited by 2
“…simple skills are likely to impact performance differently than those of a more complex or unpredictable nature, such as a volleyball game or scrimmage (Wulf and Shea 2002) and thus the relationship between two performance instances (practice and games) could also reasonably be expected to differ.”
BackgroundBonuzzi, G. M. G., Corrêa, U. C., Antunes, G. L., et al. (2017) · Motricidade · doi:10.6063/motricidade.7318 · Cited by 2
“In fact, laboratory studies have important distinctions to naturalistic tasks or Activity of Daily Living (Ingram & Wolpert, 2011; Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
BackgroundElektronenbahnen in Feldern. Konzeption und Evaluation einer webbasierten Lernumgebung
Richtberg, S. (2018) · Logos Verlag Berlin eBooks · doi:10.30819/4723 · Cited by 3
Constant and random practice on learning of volleyball serve
Ugrinowitsch, H., Matos, C. D. O., Neves, T. F., Lage, G. M., Ribeiro-Silva, P. C., & Cruz, M. P. (2019) · Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance · doi:10.5007/1980-0037.2018v20n6p598 · Cited by 3
Cognitive and Physiological Intent for the Adaptation of Motor Prostheses
Nataraj, R., Sanford, S., Liu, M., Walsh, K., Wilder, S., Santo, A., & Hollinger, D. S. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38740-2_8 · Cited by 3
Shea, C. H., Panzer, S., & Kennedy, D. M. (2016) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-801426-4.00009-2 · Cited by 8
Self-citationExtending the Structural Model of the Human Pilot to Include Concurrent Bandwidth Feedback
Karasinski, J. A., & Robinson, S. K. (2022) · AIAA SciTech Forum · doi:10.2514/6.2022-0509 · Cited by 2
Improving old tricks as new: Young adults learn from repeating everyday activities
Leizerowitz, G. M., Gabai, R., Plotnik, M., Keren, O., & Karni, A. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0285469 · Cited by 2
“The generalizability of the results from studies using laboratory tasks to the learning of real world motor skills has been questioned [32,33].”
BackgroundAnderson, D. I. (2023) · Kinesiology Review · doi:10.1123/kr.2023-0051 · Cited by 3
Croce, R. V., Martineau, D., & Smith, W. J. (2023) · International Journal of Motor Control and Learning · doi:10.61186/ijmcl.5.3.1 · Cited by 2
Stimulus variability improves generalization following response inhibition training
Moshon-Cohen, T. E., Weinbach, N., & Bitan, T. (2024) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-023-01913-w · Cited by 3
“…& Mueller, 2013; Goldstone, 1996), presumably due to differences in the nature and difficulty of the task (Carvalho & Goldstone, 2014; Smith, 1997; Wulf & Shea, 2002), suggesting that random practice may be more beneficial for tasks with low processing demands and blocked order more beneficial…”
THE ONSET AND EFFECT OF COGNITIVE FATIGUE ON SIMULATED SPORT PERFORMANCE
Mousseau, M. B. (2004) · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wulf, Gabriele
- ORCID
- Wulf, Gabriele
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 185-211
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W2083133776
- Cited by
- 829
- References
- 213
- Citations by year
- 2026: 34 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 36
- FWCI
- 1.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- 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
- Keywords
- generalizability, processing demands, motor learning, skill acquisition
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Feedback, Generalization, Response, Humans, Motor Skills, Practice, Psychological, Transfer, Psychology
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
