依據研究結果，提出未來研究與實際應用之建議等兩部分陳述如下：
一、未來研究建議方面
36
本研究試圖以操弄不同回饋給予方式檢驗挑戰點假說在不同工作難度上，學 習者需接受不同頻率回饋的預測。然而，根據本研究結論適應性練習情況下，改 變回饋給予方式無助於增加長久性的動作學習。因此建議未來研究方向須釐清回 饋與練習如何影響學習者。回饋與練習為動作學習中，缺一不可的兩個重要變 項 ，過去研究並無法單純比較學習者僅接受回饋或練習的動作學習效應，因此 若能釐清勢必便能更深入的探討兩變項如何同時操弄之相關議題。
其次，過去研究多僅針對各種變項對於動作學習影響作探討，忽略考量付出 成本多寡的效率問題，因此建議未來研究可以針對不同練習條件的動作學習效率 議題深入探究。
二、實際應用建議方面
在實際應用方面，除了須針對學習者的技能水準漸次的安排適宜的工作難度 外，亦必須考量回饋給予的時機或次數，是否造成學習者過度負荷，導致動作學 習效果或是即時的動作表現低落。
37
引用文獻
王重引、卓俊伶 (2014)。漸增情境干擾結合漸退回饋：檢驗動作學習的附加效 應。大專體育學刊，16，378-386。DOI: 10.5297/ser.1604.003
吳詩薇、張至滿、卓俊伶 (2012)。摘要結果獲知的時間與順序安排：檢驗時近 效應。大專體育學刊，14，152-160。DOI：10.5297/ser.1402.002
Al-Ameer, H., & Toole, T. (1993). Combinations of blocked and random practice orders: Benefits to acquisition and retention. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 25, 177-191.
Albaret, J. M., & Thon, B. (1998). Differential effects of task complexity on
contextual interference in a drawing task. Acta Psychologica, 100, 9-24. DOI:
10.1016/S0001-6918(98)00022-5
Ali, A., Fawver, B., Kim, J., Fairbrother, J., & Janelle, C. M. (2012). Too much of a good thing: Random practice scheduling and self-control of feedback lead to unique but not additive learning benefits. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1-9.
Brydges, R., Carnahan, H., Backstein, D., & Dubrowski, A. (2007). Application of motor learning principles to complex surgical tasks: Searching for the optimal practice schedule. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 40-48. DOI:
10.3200/JMBR.39.1.40-48
Choi, Y., Qi, F., Gordon, J., & Schweighofer, N. (2008). Performance-based adaptive schedules enhance motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 40, 273-280.
DOI: 10.3200/JMBR.40.4.273-280
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Del Rey, P., & Shewokis, P. (1993). Appropriate summary KR for learning timing tasks under conditions of high and low contextual interference. Acta
Psychologica, 83, 1-12. DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(93)90031-L
38
Del Rey, P., Wughalter, E. H., & Whitehurst, M. (1982). The effects of contextual interference on females with varied experience in open sport skills. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 53, 108-115. DOI:
10.1080/02701367.1982.10605236
Goode, S., & Magill, R. A. (1986). Contextual interference effects in learning three badminton serves. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 57, 308-314.
DOI: 10.1080/02701367.1986.10608091
Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning.
Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 212-224. DOI: 10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224
Guadagnoli, M. A., Dornier, L. A., & Tandy, R. (1996). Optimal summary knowledge of results: The influence of task related experience and complexity. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 239-248. DOI:
10.1080/02701367.1996.10607950
Guadagnoli, M. A., Holcomb, W. R., & Weber, T. J. (1999). The relationship between contextual interference effects and performer expertise on the learning of a putting task. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 37, 19-36. DOI:
10.1080/00222895.1990.10735507
Guthrie, E. R. (1952). The psychology of learning. NY: Harper & Row.
Hall, K. G., & Magill, R. A. (1995). Variability of practice and contextual
interference in motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 299-309.
DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1995.9941719
Hebert, E. P., Landin, D., & Solmon, M. A. (1996). Practice schedule effects on the performance and learning of low-and high-skilled students: An applied study.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 52-58. DOI:
10.1080/02701367.1996.10607925
Hodges, N. J., Lohse, K. R., Wilson, A., Lim, S. B., & Mulligan, D. (2014). Exploring the dynamic nature of contextual interference: Previous experience affects current practice but not learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 46, 455-467. DOI:
10.1080/00222895.2014.947911
39
Lee, T. D., & Carnahan, H. (1990). When to provide knowledge of results during motor learning: Scheduling effects. Human Performance, 3, 87-105. DOI:
10.1207/s15327043hup0302_2
Lee, T. D., & Magill, R. A. (1983). The locus of contextual interference in motor-skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 730-746. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.9.4.730
Lee, T. D., Wishart, L. R., Cunningham, S., & Carnahan, H. (1997). Modeled timing information during random practice eliminates the contextual interference effect.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68, 100-105. DOI:
10.1080/02701367.1997.10608871
Magill, R. A. (2011). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (9th ed.). NY: MaGraw-Hill.
Magill, R. A., & Hall, K. G. (1990). A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9, 241-289. DOI:
10.1016/0167-9457(90)90005-X
Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. NY:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4 Onla-or, S., & Winstein, C. J. (2008). Determining the optimal challenge point for
motor skill learning in adults with moderately severe Parkinson's disease.
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 22, 385-395. DOI:
10.1177/1545968307313508
Porter, J. M., & Magill, R. A. (2010). Systematically increasing contextual
interference is beneficial for learning sport skills. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28, 1277-1285. DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2010.502946
Porter, J. M., & Saemi, E. (2010). Moderately skilled learners benefit by practicing with systematic increases in contextual interference. International Journal of Coaching Science, 4, 61-71.
40
Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 355-386. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.95.3.355
Sanger, T. D. (2004). Failure of motor learning for large initial errors. Neural Computation, 16, 1873-1886. DOI: 10.1162/0899766041336431
Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning.
Psychological Review, 82, 225-260. DOI: 10.1037/h0076770
Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59-75). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2011). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (5th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Schmidt, R. A., Lange, C., & Young, D. E. (1990). Optimizing summary knowledge of results for skill learning. Human Movement Science, 9, 325-348. DOI:
10.1016/0167-9457(90)90007-Z
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication.
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Shea, C. H., Kohl, R., & Indermill, C. (1990). Contextual interference: Contributions of practice. Acta Psychologica, 73, 145-157. DOI:
10.1016/0001-6918(90)90076-R
Shea, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Learning and Memory, 5, 179-187. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.5.2.179
Sidaway, B., Ahn, S., Boldeau, P., Griffin, S., Noyes, B., & Pelletier, K. (2008). A comparison of manual guidance and knowledge of results in the learning of a weight-bearing skill. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 32, 32-38. DOI:
10.1097/NPT.0b013e318165948d
41
Sidaway, B., Bates, J., Occhiogrosso, B., Schlagenhaufer, J., & Wilkes, D. (2012).
Interaction of feedback frequency and task difficulty in children's motor skill learning. Physical Therapy, 92, 948-957. DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20110378
Sidhu, R. S., Park, J., Brydges, R., MacRae, H. M., & Dubrowski, A. (2007).
Laboratory-based vascular anastomosis training: A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of bench model fidelity and level of training on skill acquisition. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 45, 343-349. DOI:
10.1016/j.jvs.2006.09.040
Simon, D. A., & Bjork, R. A. (2001). Metacognition in motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 907-912. DOI:
10.1037/0278-7393.27.4.907
Simon, D. A., Cullen, J. D., & Lee, T. D. (2002). Win-shift/lose-stay: Contingent switching as an alternative to random practice? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 24, 116-116. DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.008961
Simon, D. A., Lee, T. D., & Cullen, J. D. (2008). Win-shift, lose-stay: Contingent switching and contextual interference in motor learning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 107, 407-418. DOI: 10.2466/pms.107.2.407-418
Sparrow, W. A., & Summers, J. J. (1992). Performance on trials without knowledge of results (KR) in reduced relative frequency presentations of KR. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 197-209. DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1992.9941615
Sugarman, B. (1989). The well-managed human service organization: Criteria for a management audit. Administration in Social Work, 12, 17-27. DOI:
10.1300/J147v12n04_02
Sullivan, K. J., Kantak, S. S., & Burtner, P. A. (2008). Motor learning in children:
Feedback effects on skill acquisition. Physical Therapy, 88, 720-732. DOI:
10.2522/ptj.20070196
Swinnen, S. P., Walter, C. B., Serrien, D. J., & Vandendriessche, C. (1992). The effect of movement speed on upper-limb coupling strength. Human Movement Science, 11, 615-636. DOI: 10.1016/0167-9457(92)90018-7
42
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in socirty: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Winstein, C. J., & Schmidt, R. A. (1990). Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 677-691. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.16.4.677
Winstein, C. J., Pohl, P. S., & Lewthwaite, R. (1994). Effects of physical guidance and knowledge of results on motor learning: Support for the guidance hypothesis.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65, 316-323. DOI:
10.1080/02701367.1994.10607635
Wu, W. F., & Magill, R. A. (2011). Allowing learners to choose: Self-controlled practice schedules for learning multiple movement patterns. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 449-457. DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2011.10599777
Wu, W. F., Young, D. E., Schandler, S. L., Meir, G., Judy, R. L., Perez, J., & Cohen, M. J. (2011). Contextual interference and augmented feedback: Is there an additive effect for motor learning? Human Movement Science, 30, 1092-1101.
DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2011.02.004
Wulf, G., & Schmidt, R. A. (1989). The learning of generalized motor programs:
Reducing the relative frequency of knowledge of results enhances memory.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 748-757. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.15.4.748
Wulf, G., Hörger, M., & Shea, C. H. (1999). Benefits of blocked over serial feedback on complex motor skill learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 31, 95-103. DOI:
10.1080/00222899909601895
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. DOI: 10.1080/00222895.1994.9941692
Wulf, G., Schmidt, R. A., & Deubel, H. (1993). Reduced feedback frequency enhances generalized motor program learning but not parameterization learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1134-1150.
DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.19.5.1134
43
附 錄
44
附錄一
慣用手問卷
項目 勾選欄
用筷子吃飯，我會用 右手□ 左手□
簽名時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
畫圖時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
需要切水果時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
需要用湯匙喝湯時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
喝飲料需插吸管時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
使用打火機時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
掃地時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
刷牙時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
投擲垃圾時，我會用 右手□ 左手□
翻譯摘錄自Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97-113.
45
附錄二
參與者知情同意書
您好：
我是國立臺灣師範大學體育學系碩士班研究生，目前正在進行「適應性回饋 的動作表現與學習效應：檢驗挑戰點假說」的研究，誠摯邀請您參與本研究。本 研究實驗的時間為兩天共約一小時，實驗的工作為使用慣用手吸盤球拋擲動作。
研究進行的動作不具危險性，也不會對您的身心健康帶來傷害。為了確保您的隱 私權，任何有您的資料均會被妥善保管，他人無從得知，將來研究發表或是出版 時亦不會予以呈現，您可以自由選擇是否參加此研究，在您簽名同意後或是研究 期間，若是您改變意願想退出，可以隨時通知研究者而不會受到任何限制。若有 任何疑問，歡迎與研究者聯繫。
研 究 者：王重引 指導教授：卓俊伶 博士
單位：國立臺灣師範大學體育學系 聯絡電話：王重引 0972812568 卓俊伶 (02) 7734-3201
--- 研究參與者同意書
經過詳細閱讀以上內容，我以了解且同意參與此研究。
姓名： 性別：
出生日期：民國 年 月 日 聯絡電話：
46
47
48
表7 立即保留測驗平均準確分數值之獨立樣本單因子變異數分析摘要表
變異來源 SS df MS F η2
組間 (B) 2758.26 2 1379.13 6.81* .29 組內 (W) 6676.35 33 202.31
全體 (Total) 9434.62 35 p < .05
表8 立即保留測驗平均準確分數值之組間主要效果事後比較表
組別 M 適應性回饋組 50%回饋組 全部回饋組
適應性回饋組 73.00 - * *
50%回饋組 54.34 - -
全部回饋組 54.54 -
p < .05
表9 延遲保留測驗平均準確分數值之獨立樣本單因子變異數分析摘要表
變異來源 SS df MS F η2
組間 (B) 3627.06 2 1813.53 9.04* .36 組內 (W) 6617.49 33 200.53
全體 (Total) 10244.55 35 p < .05
表10 延遲保留測驗平均準確分數值之組間主要效果事後比較表
組別 M 適應性回饋組 50%回饋組 全部回饋組
適應性回饋組 67.30 - * *
50%回饋組 47.08 - -
全部回饋組 45.08 -
p < .05
49
表11 動作學習效率之獨立樣本單因子變異數分析摘要表
變異來源 SS df MS F η2
組間 (B) 6.22 2 3.11 4.35* .21 組內 (W) 23.61 33 .71
全體 (Total) 29.83 35 p < .05
表12 動作學習效率之組間主要效果事後比較表
組別 M 適應性回饋組 50%回饋組 全部回饋組
適應性回饋組 2.56 - * *
50%回饋組 1.74 - -
全部回饋組 1.63 -
p < .05