JAVS Fall 2016

and Transfer of a Motor Skill,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 5, no. 2 (1979): 179-187. 5. For those who are curious, the groups that performed the best were those who were tested in a blocked fashion (regardless of how they practiced). They were only marginally better, however, than those who practiced in an interleaved manner and were tested in an interleaved manner. For a clearer graph of this data than is in the original study, see: Nicholas C. Sonderstrom and Robert A. Bjork, “Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 10, no. 2 (2015): 176-199. The graph in question appears on page 181. 7. Chien-Ho (Janice) Lin et al., “Brain-Behavior Correlates of Optimizing Learning Through Interleaved Practice,” NeuroImage 56 (2011): 1758 1772. 8. Sunbin Song et al., “White Matter Microstructural Correlates of Superior Long-Term Skill Gained Implicitly under Randomized Practice,” Cerebral Cortex 22 (2011): 1671-1677. 9. Jared M. Porter and Esmaeel Saemi, “Moderately Skilled Learners Benefit by Practicing with Systematic Increases in Contextual Interference,” International Journal of Coaching Science 4, no. 2 (2010): 61-71. 6. Ibid., 177.

Notes 1. Kellie Green Hall, Derek A. Domingues, and Richard Cavazos, “Contextual Interference Effects with Skilled Baseball Players,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 78 (1994): 835-841. 2. For an excellent review of this research, see: see: Nicholas C. Sonderstrom and Robert A. Bjork, “Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 10, no. 2 (2015): 176-199. Papers specific to the examples cited here include: Dennis K. Landin, et al., “The Effects of Variable Practice on the Performance of a Basketball Skill,” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 64 (1993): 232–237; D. Penelope Green, et al., “Practice Variability and Transfer of a Racket Skill,” Perceptual & Motor Skills 81 (1995): 1275–1281; Sinah Goode and Richard A. Magill, “Contextual Interference Effects in Learning Three Badminton Serves,” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 57, no. 4 (1986): 308-314; Jared M. Porter et al., “The Effects of Three Levels of Contextual Interference on Performance Outcomes and Movement Patterns in Golf Skills,” International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching 22 (2007): 243–255; Peter J. K. Smith, “Applying Contextual Interference to Snowboarding Skills,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 95 (2002): 999–1005; Jeroen J. G. van Merrienboer, et al., (1997). “The Transfer Paradox: Effects of Contextual Interference on Retention and Transfer Performance of a Complex Cognitive Skill,” Perceptual & Motor Skills 84 (1997): 784–786; Suzanne M. Mannes and Walter Kintsch, “Knowledge Organization and Text Organization,” Cognition and Instruction 4 (1987): 91–115; Chien-Ho (Janice) Lin, et al., “Contextual Interference Effects in Sequence Learning for Younger and Older Adults,” Psychology and Aging 25 (2010): 929–939; Diane M. Ste-Marie, et al., “High Levels of Contextual Interference Enhance Handwriting Acquisition,” Journal of Motor Behavior 36 (2004): 115–126. 3. Branden Abushanab and Anthony J. Bishara, “Memory and Metacognition for Piano Melodies: Illusory Advantage of Fixed- over Random-Order Practice,” Memory and Cognition 41, no. 6 (2013): 928-937.

4. John B. Shea and Robyn L. Morgan, “Contextual Interference Effects on the Acquisition, Retention,

42

Journal of the American Viola Society / Vol. 32, No. 2, Fall 2016