This document discusses different methods for practicing a double-dutch jumping task, including whole practice versus part practice. It describes a study where one subject (Madeleine) practiced the task as a whole (A-B-C sequence) while the other (Rachael) broke it into parts (B, then B-C, then A-B, then the full sequence A-B-C). Both methods led to similar retention and transfer, suggesting they are equally effective for this serial motor task. The document also reviews concepts like acquisition, retention, motor programs, guidance, and provides example transfer tasks.

2.  Double-Dutch
› Entering ropes (A)
› Sustained jumping (B)
› Exiting ropes (C)
 Part Practice
› A, A… AB, AB… ABC, ABC (repetitive part)
› C, C… BC, BC… ABC, ABC (backward chaining)
› AB, AB… C, C… ABC, ABC (progressive part)
 Part vs. Whole Practice.
› ABC, ABC, ABC
› B, B… BC, BC… AB, AB… ABC, ABC
 Chunking (Hansen, 2005)
› Overlap vs. no overlap
› Facilitate transition to whole task performance

3.  Part-practice is better with serial tasks
that can be broken down into parts.
› Gymnastics routine, wheelchair transfers

4.  Whole practice is better when
coordination of movements is most
important.
› Flying a plane, driving a ferry

5.  Motor Programs
› Multiple Motor Programs: Practice the task in
parts
› Single Motor Program: Practice the task as a
whole
 We hypothesized that part-practice
would lead to better retention and
transfer for double-dutch because it’s a
serial task with distinct parts. There isn’t a
high interdependence of parts.

7.  Madeleine performed whole task in an
A,B,C fashion.
 Rachael performed part-practice in the
following way:
› B
› BC
› AB
› ABC
 Environment
› Mostly closed environment
 Some spectators and cars occasionally

8. Madeleine Early Trial

9. Madeleine Success

10. Rachael B Practice

11. Rachael BC Practice

12. Rachael AB Practice

13. Rachael ABC  Whole Task Success

14.  Guidance Hypothesis
› Less is better
 Verbal
› Focus of attention
› Knowledge of movement mechanics
 Observational
 No physical guidance
 No guidance given during retention and
transfer

15.  4 days between acquisition and
retention/transfer.
 Retention was measured by having both
subjects performing the whole task.
 Transfer tasks
› Change in environment
 Sam and Scott changed places (SWITCH)
› Change in task and environment
 Sam and Scott revolving around the jumper
(SPIN)

22. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Madeleine Rachael
Trials
Subjct
Acquisition
B
BC
AB
ABC
Total

23. 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Madeleine Rachael
Trials
Subject
Retention and Transfer Results
Retention
Transfer
Spin

24.  Cognitive Stage
› Learning the task
 Associative Stage
› Putting the whole task together
› Retention and transfer
 Autonomous Stage
› Are you an expert?

25.  Raw data seems to show that acquisition
was better using whole practice, but...
› Comparing apples and oranges
 Both practice techniques were equally
effective in transfer and retention.
Person
Task Environment

26.  Feedback
› Goal setting
› Demonstration
› Instruction
 Inherent: with practice, messing up in the ropes
 Augmented: Click of the rope, communication
 Memory
› Working
› Long Term
 Knowledge of Performance
 Knowledge of Results

27.  More practice during acquisition
› Long term memory
 Control equal rest times between subjects
 Controlling other personal factors
› Riding bike to school
 Highly relevant in clinic: Change task or
environment based on personal factors
 Explore other transfer tasks
› Butterfly turning
› More complex jumping in rope

29.  Gymnastics Routine
› http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/Ef2TEkVLmLA/A
rtistic+Gymnastics+NHK+Trophy+Day+1/3zeYLb4
hDiN
 Wheelchair Transfer
› http://www.msktc.org/sci/factsheets/safe-
transfer-technique
 Apples and Oranges
› http://underthesaltireflag.com/2014/07/19/appl
es-versus-oranges-hitler-versus-jamaica-cause/