The influence of robotic guidance on error detection and correction mechanisms

2019 
Abstract New technologies have expanded the available methods to help individuals learn or re-learn motor skills. Despite equivocal evidence for the impact of robotic guidance for motor skill acquisition (Marchal-Crespo, McHughen, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2010), we have recently shown that robotic guidance mixed with unassisted practice can significantly improve the learning of a golf putting task (Bested & Tremblay, 2018). To understand the mechanisms associated with this new mixed approach (i.e., unassisted and robot-guided practice) for the learning of a golf putting task, the current study aimed to determine if such mixed practice extends to one’s ability to detect errors. Participants completed a pre-test, an acquisition phase, as well as immediate, delayed (24-h), and transfer post-tests. During the pre-test, kinematic data from the putter was converted into highly accurate, consistent, and smooth trajectories delivered by a robot arm. During acquisition, 2 groups performed putts towards 3 different targets with robotic guidance on either 0% or 50% of acquisition trials. Only the 50% guidance group significantly reduced ball endpoint distance and variability, as well as ball endpoint error estimations, between the pre-test and the post-tests (i.e., immediate retention, 24-h retention, and 24-h transfer). The current study showed that allowing one to experience both robotic guidance and unassisted (i.e., errorful) performances enhances one’s ability to detect errors, which can explain the beneficial motor learning effects of a mixed practice schedule.
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    30
    References
    3
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []