Introduction: The effectiveness of self-regulation, or self-control, for learning has been demonstrated in the verbal or cognitive learning for a number of years (for an overview see Boekaerts et al., 2000, Handbook of self-regulation, San Diego a.o.: Academic Press). More recently, researchers have also begun to examine the effect of self-regulation on motor skill learning. In general, these studies show that self-regulation during the learning process can lead to better motor performance. However, in previous studies the researchers stated which aspect of the practice situation should be self-regulated by the learner. Individual preferences have not been considered. Thus, the purpose of our study was to examine the effects of self-regulating a preferred versus non-preferred practice condition during learning the forehand top spin in table tennis. It was hypothesized that participants who can self-regulate a preferred practice condition outperform participants who have the control over a non-preferred practice condition. Method: First, the participants (N=52) filled out a questionnaire in order to check up which practice conditions during the learning of the top spin-technique they would prefer for self-regulating and which not. The most preferred practice condition was the frequency of movement instruction; the less preferred condition was the choice of tasks during a practice session. Based on this results the subjects were randomly assigned to one of the following experimental groups: (1) Self-regulation of a preferred practice condition; (2) Self-regulation of a non-preferred practice condition; (3) Regulation of a preferred condition by the instructor; (4) Regulation of a non-preferred condition by the instructor. After a baseline test all participants completed two practice sessions, separated by a 2-day interval. Each practice session consisted of 100 trials. On the following days, the participants performed retention and transfer tests. All sessions (baseline, practice, retention, and transfer) were videotaped. The dependent measures included form (rating of experts) and ac-curacy (target area) of the forehand top spin. Results: Movement accuracy: All groups demonstrated a consistent increase in the accuracy of the movement across the practice trials (F(9,432)=7.42; p<.001). The main effects of self-regulation and preference were not significant. Also on the retention test there were no significant differences between the groups. On the transfer test, groups that had controlled their practice on a preferred condition (independent from self-regulation or not) had clearly higher scores than the groups that had regulated a non-preferred practice condition (F(1,48)=4.98 p=.03). Movement form: In terms of movement quality, we found across the practice phase a tendency for better performance of the self-regulating groups as compared with the groups that were regulated by the instructor (F(1,48)=3.72; p=.08). Again, on the retention and transfer tests the self-regulated groups had higher form scores than the instructor-controlled groups (F(1,48)=3.42; p<.05 and F(1,48)=5.95; p<.01). Discussion: Our goal in this study was to examine whether self-regulated movement learning is more effective, when it refers to a practice condition which is preferred by the learner. The results show differential effects of self-regulation and the preference of practice conditions. Altogether, the findings suggest that the benefits of self-regulated learning are not only caused by motivational processes. Rather it seems to be important to consider cognitive processes, e.g. the processing and representation of movement-related information.
© Copyright 2006 Journal of Sports Sciences. Taylor & Francis. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.