一、 具有間隔介入之特定性練習組別，相較於無間隔介入之「特定」組，在動作的準 確性與穩定性方面，無助於空間性的動作表現。
二、 具有間隔介入之特定性練習組別，相較於無間隔介入之「特定」組，在動作的準 確性方面，有助於空間性的動作學習。
第二節 建議
依據本研究的結論，分為：一、未來研究方向；二、研究之應用兩部分提出以下建 議。
一、未來研究方向：
本研究對間隔效應以及特定性練習的探討，僅是動作學習領域中，練習安排相關
54
議題的一小部分，且針對本研究的內容，未來仍有許多變項可以嘗試探討與修正，使間 隔效應與特定性練習的相關研究更趨完善。依據本文之內容，未來可再進一步探討的研 究方向如下：
1. 本研究發現，空間性動作的相關實驗在獲得期各階段，若間隔介入的形式為變異動 作的練習，則進行統計分析時，會出現因不同目標距離所造成的誤差值起伏狀態，
為考驗相同標準工作的動作的誤差值，除了如本研究將獲得期的動作誤差值換算成 百分比的方式外，亦可增加練習的次數，僅比較不同組別試作相同目標距離的誤差 值，以更明確地呈現不同組別的準確性與穩定性。
2. 未來可嘗試在變異練習情境下，透過不同形式的間隔介入，來觀察間隔的介入對變 異練習在空間性動作表現與學習之影響。
3. 本研究發現，間隔的介入雖不利於獲得期當下的動作表現，但有助於長時間的動作 學習，因此推測間隔的介入是一種學習變項。建議未來可以延長間隔介入的時間、
保留測驗的天數以及保留測驗的試作次數，來觀察長時間的間隔介入與長時間的保 留動作學習的效果，並透過長、短期記憶的觀點來探討之。
4. 間隔的介入確實影響動作表現與學習甚巨，因此，未來可嘗試設計更多元的間隔介 入形式，來找出最有效提升動作表現與學習的練習安排內容。
5. 未來可嘗試將年齡納入檢驗範圍，進行對不同年齡層對象的檢驗，並設定發展的等
55
級，以有效控制影響實驗結果的變項，找出最適合不同年齡層的練習安排內容。
6. 本研究以簡單實驗室的工作來檢驗各組的動作表現與學習，無法廣泛推論至真實世 界的複雜工作，因此，未來研究可嘗試採用日常生活中的活動或工作來進行，以提 高研究的生態效度。或是增加質性訪談部分，以更深入了解學習者的內在想法與策 略運用。
二、實務應用：
在動作技能的教學情境中，間隔的介入能提升學習者長時間的動作保留效果，因此 未來在課程內容的設計上，宜嘗試在同一項目的練習中增長間隔的時間，且單純的休息 時間又比進行變異的練習項目更能有效提升長時間的學習效果。
56
Adams, J. A., & Dijkstra, S. (1966). Short-term memory for motor responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 314-318.
Adams, J. A. (1971). A closed-loop theory of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 111-149.
Adams, J. A. (1987). Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 41-74.
Arthur, M. G., & Steven, M. S. (1981). Spacing repetitions and solving problems are not the same. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 110-119.
Bachman, J. C. (1961). Specificity vs. generality in learning and performing two large muscle motor tasks. Research Quarterly, 37, 176-186.
57
Balota, D. A., Duchen, J. M., & Paullin, R. (1989). Age-related difference in the impact of pacing, lag, and retention interval. Psychology and Aging, 4, 3-9.
Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. E. (1993). Maintenance of foreing language vocabulary and the spacing effect. Psychological Science,4, 316-321.
Barnett, M. L., Ross, D., Schmidt, R. A., & Todd, B. (1973). Motor skill learning and the specificity of training principle. Research Quarterly, 44, 440-447.
Blandin, Y., Toussaint, L., & Shea, C. H. (2008). Specific of practice: Interaction between concurrent sensory information and terminal feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition ,34, 994-1000.
Catalano, J. F., & Kleiner, B. M. (1984). Distant transfer in coincident timing as a function of variability of practice. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 58, 851-856.
Cepeda, N. J.,Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19, 1095-1102.
Cuddy, L. J., & Jacoby. L. L. (1982). When forgetting helps memory: An analysis of repetition effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 451-467.
Dempster, F. N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43, 627-634.
Fairbrother, J.T., Shea, J.B., & Marzilli, T.S. (2007). Repeated retention testing effects do not generalize to a contextual interference protocol. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78,465.
Flanagan, H., & Spurgeon, P. (1996). Public sector managerial effectiveness: Theory and practice in the national health service. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Glenberg, A, M. (1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 7, 95-112.
Glenberg, A. M., & Steven, M. (1981). Spacing repetitions and solving problems are not the same. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 110-119.
58
Green, R. L. (1990). Specing effects on implicit memory test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1004-1011.
Henry, F. M. (1968). Specificity vs. generality in learning motor skill. In R.C. Brown & G.S.
Kenyon (Eds.), Classical studies on physical activity (pp. 341-340). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. (Original work published in 1958)
Khan, M. A., Frank, I. M., & Goodman, D. (1998). The effect of practice on component submovements is dependent on the availability of visual feedback. Journal of Motor Behavior, 32, 227-240.
Krigolson, O. E., & Tremblay, L. (2009). The amount of practice really matters: Specificity of practice may be valid only after sufficient practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80, 197-204.
Lloyd, R. P., Richard, W., Meredith, K., & Dorothy, S. (1963). Effect of spacing presentations on retention of a paired associate over short intervals. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 66, 206-209.
Lorraine, G. A. (1979). The perception of time. Perception and Psychophysics, 26, 340-354.
Magill, R. A. (2004). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Magill, R. A. (1998). Knowledge is more than we can talk about: Implicit learning in motor skill acquisition. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 69, 104-110.
Magill, R. A., & Hall, K. G. (1990). A review of the contextual interaction effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241-289.
Mentzer, J. T., & Konrad, B. P. (1991). An efficiency/effectiveness approach to logistics performance analysis. Journal of Business Logistics, 12, 33-51.
Moxely, S. E. (1979). Schema: The variability of practice hypothesis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 11, 65-70.
59
Newell, K. M., & Shapiro, D. C. (1976). Vailability of practice and transfer of training: Some evidence toward a schema view of motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 8,
233-243.
Pew, R. W. (1966). Acquisition of hierarchical control over the temporal organi-zation of a skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 764-771.
Proteau, L. (1992). On the specificity of learning and the role of visual information for movement control. In L. Proteau & D. Elliote (Eds.), Vision and motor control (pp.
67-103). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Proteau, L., Marteniuk, R. G., Girouard, Y., & Dugas, C. (1987). On the type of information used to control and learn an aiming movement after moderate and extensive training.
Human Movement Science, 6, 181-199.
Proteau, L., Trembaly, L., & DeJaeger, D. (1998). Practice dose not diminish the role of visual information in online control of a precision walking task: Support for the specificity of practice hypothesis. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 143-150.
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 82, 225-260.
Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59-75). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2005). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Schmidt, R. A., & Wrisberg, C. A. (2000). Motor learning and performance: A problem-based learning approach (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Shea, C. H., & Kohl, R. M. (1990). Specificity and variability of practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61, 169-177.
Shea, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual interference effect on the acquisition, retention and transfer of motor skill. Journal of Expermental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 179-181.
60
Shea, C. H., Shebilske, W. L., & Worchel, S. (1993). Motor learning and control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Shea, C. H., Wulf, G., & Whitacre, C. (1999). Enhancing training efficiency and
effectiveness through the use of dyad training. Journal of Motor Behavior, 31, 119-125.
Singer, R. N. (1966). Transfer effects and ultimate success in archery due to degree of difficulty of the initial learning. Research Quarterly, 37, 532-539.
Singer R. N. (1980). Motor learning and human performance: An application to motor skills and movement behaviors (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Sudit, E. F. (1996). Effectiveness, quality and efficiency: A management oriented approach.
Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Tawney, J. W., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single-subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Tremblay, L., & Proteau, L. (1998). Specificity of practice: The case of prowerlifting.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69, 284-289.
Underwood, B. J. (1970). A breakdown of the total-time law in free-recall learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 573-580.
Van der Meulen, P. R. H., & Spijkerman, G. (1985). The logistics input-output model and its application. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Materials Management, 15, 17-25.
Winstein, C. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results
enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Connition, 16, 677-691.
Wrisberg, C. A., & Ragsdale, M. R. (1979). Further tests of Schmidt’s schema theory:
Development of a schema for a coincident timing task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 11, 159-166.
61
Wulf, G., Lee, T. D., & Schmidt, R. A. (1994). Reducing knowledge of results about relative versus absolute timing: Differential effects on learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 362-369.
Yoshida, M., Cauraugh, J. H., & Chow, J. W. (2004). Specificity of practice, visual
information, and intersegmental dynamics in rapid-aiming limb movements. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 281-290.
62
附 錄
63
64
附錄二
表 1 線性移動工作之分組動作內容
（動作距離：A1＝34 公分；A2＝23 公分；底數為試作次數）
組別 獲得期 保留測驗
特定+間隔 𝐀𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀𝟒𝟏 𝐀𝟓𝟏 … 𝐀𝟏𝟑𝟎 𝐀𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀 𝟒𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟓
特定 𝐀𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀𝟏𝟒 𝐀𝟏𝟓 𝐀𝟏𝟔 𝐀𝟏𝟕 𝐀𝟏𝟖 𝐀𝟏𝟗 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟎 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟑𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟒 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟓 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟔 𝐀𝟏𝟕𝟏 … 𝐀𝟏𝟏𝟎𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀 𝟒𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟓
序列變異 𝐀 𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟐𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟐𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀𝟐𝟑 𝐀𝟏𝟒 𝐀𝟒𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟓 𝐀𝟐𝟓 𝐀𝟏𝟔 𝐀𝟐𝟔 𝐀𝟏𝟕 𝐀𝟐𝟕 𝐀𝟏𝟖 𝐀𝟐𝟖 𝐀𝟏𝟗 … 𝐀𝟏𝟓𝟒 𝐀𝟏𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟐 𝐀𝟏𝟑 𝐀 𝟒𝟏 𝐀𝟏𝟓
65
66
67
68
69
70