Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 May 30;14(1):12414.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63387-z.

The effect of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on motor learning in children at risk for developmental coordination disorder

Reyhane Shahbaz  1 , Esmaeel Saemi  2 , Mohammadreza Doustan  1 , Jennifer A Hogg  3 , Jed A Diekfuss  4   5   6
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The effect of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on motor learning in children at risk for developmental coordination disorder

Reyhane Shahbaz et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Numerous efforts have been made to test the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in healthy children and adult populations. However, only a small number of studies have tested this theory in children with cognitive-motor disorders, such as developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The present study aims to examine the individual and additive effects of a visual illusion and self-controlled practice on a golf putting task in children at risk for DCD based on the OPTIMAL theory. Forty children at risk for DCD (mean age = 8.57 ± 1.05 years) were randomly assigned to four experimental groups (1-small visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 2-big visual illusion + self-controlled practice; 3-small visual illusion + yoked; 4-big visual illusion + yoked). Following 12 pretest trials of a golf putting task, the participants completed 5 blocks of 12 trials of practice on the first day. A retention test (12 trials) and a transfer dual-task test (12 trials) were conducted on the second day. The results indicated that in retention test the big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group was significantly better than the small visual illusion + yoked group (p = 0.01), while there was not any other significant difference between groups at retention test as well as between all groups at practice phase and transfer test (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). In other words, an additive effect has been observed just in the retention test but not the practice phase as well as transfer test. In general, the results of this study support the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning in children at risk for DCD and suggests to all educators who work with these children to use the combination of the visual illusion with self-controlled practice to improve the motor learning of children at risk for DCD.

Keywords: Autonomy support; DCD; Ebbinghaus illusion; Enhanced expectancies; Motor learning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A schematic illustration of the golf putting task for all experimental conditions (normal condition and small or big visual illusion conditions).
Figure 2
Figure 2
The flowchart of study procedure.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Golf putting accuracy for all experimental groups during pretest, practice, retention as well as transfer. Error bars represent standard deviation. As can be seen, the experimental groups are similar in the practice phase as well as the transfer test, but in the retention test, it can be seen that the big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group is significantly better than the small visual illusion + yoked group while there are no significant difference between other groups. SVI-SC: small visual illusion + self-controlled practice group, BIV-SC: big visual illusion + self-controlled practice group; SVI-Y: small visual illusion + yoked group; BVI-Y: big visual illusion + yoked group; RE: radial error.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Barnett AL. Motor assessment in developmental coordination disorder: From identification to intervention. Int. J. Disabil. Dev. Educ. 2008;55(2):113–129. doi: 10.1080/10349120802033436. - DOI
    1. American Psychiatric Association DS, American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
    1. Blank R, Barnett AL, Cairney J, Green D, Kirby A, Polatajko H, Rosenblum S, Smits-Engelsman B, Sugden D, Wilson P, Vinçon S. International clinical practice recommendations on the definition, diagnosis, assessment, intervention, and psychosocial aspects of developmental coordination disorder. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 2019;61(3):242–285. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.14132. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zwicker JG, Missiuna C, Harris SR, Boyd LA. Developmental coordination disorder: A review and update. Eur. J. Paediatr. Neurol. 2012;16(6):573–581. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2012.05.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wilmut K, Wann JP, Brown JH. Problems in the coupling of eye and hand in the sequential movements of children with developmental coordination disorder. Child Care Health Dev. 2006;32(6):665–678. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2006.00678.x. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types