Massed Practice And Dictributive Practice Essays -

Massed Practice And Dictributive Practice Running head: MASSED PRACTICE AND DICTRIBUTIVE PRACTICE The Effects of Massed Practice and Distributive Practice on Motor Skill Task. Evelyn Delgado Queens College/ City University of New York Abstract Over a century scientist have wonder if massed practice conditions are superior to distributive practice conditions or visa versa. According to a mete-analytic review scientists have researched this very phenomenon and have concluded that distributive practices conditions are superior to those of massed practice conditions in a variety of situations. These results are supported by Maureen Bergondy's experiment on team practice schedules as well as William C. Chasey's experiment on distribution of practice on learning retention and relearning. This experiment deals with the relationship between conditions of massed practice and distributive practice with respect to task performance. The motor skill task performed by subjects in this study wrote the English alphabet upside down fifty times. One group was given the massed practice motor task; while subjects from the five other groups practiced the motor task under five different distributions of time. However, our findings do not suppor t those of previous findings. Our mixed factorial experiment with 51 subjects indicates that neither massed practice conditions or distributive practice conditions were superior. Therefore, the subjects' acquisition of the motor task did not improve as a result of massed or distributed practice, but rather as the result of practice alone. Massed Practice and Distributive Practice Massed practice conditions are those in which individuals practice a task continuously without rest. While distributive practice conditions are those in which individuals are given rest intervals within the practice session. This mixed factorial experiment with 51 subjects deals with the effects of massed practice and distributive practice with respect to acquisition of motor task. The questioned posed in this study is whether distributive practice will be more effective than massed practice in helping individuals to learn motor skill tasks. Scientists have wondered if massed practice conditions are superior to distributive practice conditions or visa versa. A mete-analytic review conducted by Donovan Radosevich researched this very phenomenon and concluded that distributive practices conditions are superior to massed practice conditions with respect to task performance. The analysis consisted of 63 studies with 112 effects sizes yield an overall mean weighted effect size of 0.46, in dicating that individuals in distributive practice condition performed significantly higher that those in massed practice conditions. Like wise these results are supported by Maureen Bergondy's experiment on team practice schedules as well as William C. Chasey's experiment on distribution of practice on learning retention and relearning. Maureen Bergondy's experiment deals with the importance of practice schedules that optimize learning skills. Teams practiced under either a massed or distributive practice schedule and were tested under a short-term or long-term retention intervals. These results support once more the distributive practice effect for learning. William C. Chasey's experiment on distribution of practice on learning retention and relearning was conducted on a group of 72 randomly assigned retarded boys. The stabilometer task was used to study the difference between massed practice and distributive practice on initial acquisition retention, and relearning of gross motor skills. The results of this experiment support the general idea that distributive practice was superior to massed practice conditions for initial skills acquisition. In the present study the task being learned by participants is fairly easy, writing the English Alphabet upside down from right to left. The purpose of the present study is to see if there is a systematic increase of correct letters printed as the periods of rest increase. We also want to see if there is an effect of practice. Furthermore we also want to see if there is an interaction between trials sets and distribution of practice. From the acquired data we hypothesize subjects in conditions 1 will write less letters at trial 30 than subjects in condition 5. This do to the distributive practice condition given to condition 5 oppose to that of the massed practice condition give to condition 1. Method Participants There were fifty-five subjects out of which four were excluded for failure to following instructions. Nineteen Experimental Psychology 213 students from Queens College participated in the experiment as subjects and experimenters to meet a course requirement and 36 subject that where recruited by different students