{"id":{"repo_id":"unlv","oai_identifier":"oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-2369"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/unlv/oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-2369","repository":{"repo_id":"unlv","name":"University of Nevada - Las Vegas","base_url":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Salient features of contextual interference and knowledge of results","abstract":"The current study investigated the relationship between the contextual interference effect and knowledge of results manipulations. Specifically, three variations of a relative timing task were presented in either a blocked or random schedule, and participants were either required to error estimate or given no instruction concerning estimation. A 2 (Acquisition Context) x 2 (Error Estimation Frequency) ANOVA was used to analyze absolute error (AE), variable error (VE) and a relative timing measure (AE(prop.)). The main effects that there was a blocked advantage during retention. In addition, a 100% estimation advantage existed for AE and VE, but was not present for AE(prop.). These results indicate that the relative difficulty of the task may have been too high to produce a random group advantage and that error estimation of relative timing may have been too much for the participant to process. In conclusion, it was proposed that the two factors may interact, but relative difficulty of the task needs to be taken into account.","abstract_html":"The current study investigated the relationship between the contextual interference effect and knowledge of results manipulations. Specifically, three variations of a relative timing task were presented in either a blocked or random schedule, and participants were either required to error estimate or given no instruction concerning estimation. A 2 (Acquisition Context) x 2 (Error Estimation Frequency) ANOVA was used to analyze absolute error (AE), variable error (VE) and a relative timing measure (AE(prop.)). The main effects that there was a blocked advantage during retention. In addition, a 100% estimation advantage existed for AE and VE, but was not present for AE(prop.). These results indicate that the relative difficulty of the task may have been too high to produce a random group advantage and that error estimation of relative timing may have been too much for the participant to process. In conclusion, it was proposed that the two factors may interact, but relative difficulty of the task needs to be taken into account.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Kearney, Morgan Steven"],"institution":"University of Nevada, Las Vegas","degree_name":"Master of Science (MS)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Kinesiology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Mark Guadagnoli"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2002,"date_issued":"2002-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2002-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:25:26Z","subjects":[],"languages":["English"],"rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/1370"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/1370","href":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/1370","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25669/fbjh-7x0f","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Mark Guadagnoli"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Kearney, Morgan Steven"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Kinesiology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science (MS)"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10.25669/fbjh-7x0f","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/1370","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/2369/viewcontent/uc.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The current study investigated the relationship between the contextual interference effect and knowledge of results manipulations. Specifically, three variations of a relative timing task were presented in either a blocked or random schedule, and participants were either required to error estimate or given no instruction concerning estimation. A 2 (Acquisition Context) x 2 (Error Estimation Frequency) ANOVA was used to analyze absolute error (AE), variable error (VE) and a relative timing measure (AE(prop.)). The main effects that there was a blocked advantage during retention. In addition, a 100% estimation advantage existed for AE and VE, but was not present for AE(prop.). These results indicate that the relative difficulty of the task may have been too high to produce a random group advantage and that error estimation of relative timing may have been too much for the participant to process. In conclusion, it was proposed that the two factors may interact, but relative difficulty of the task needs to be taken into account."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Salient features of contextual interference and knowledge of results"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Mark Guadagnoli"],"dc:creator":["Kearney, Morgan Steven"],"dc:description.abstract":["The current study investigated the relationship between the contextual interference effect and knowledge of results manipulations. Specifically, three variations of a relative timing task were presented in either a blocked or random schedule, and participants were either required to error estimate or given no instruction concerning estimation. A 2 (Acquisition Context) x 2 (Error Estimation Frequency) ANOVA was used to analyze absolute error (AE), variable error (VE) and a relative timing measure (AE(prop.)). The main effects that there was a blocked advantage during retention. In addition, a 100% estimation advantage existed for AE and VE, but was not present for AE(prop.). These results indicate that the relative difficulty of the task may have been too high to produce a random group advantage and that error estimation of relative timing may have been too much for the participant to process. In conclusion, it was proposed that the two factors may interact, but relative difficulty of the task needs to be taken into account."],"dc:format":["pdf"],"dc:identifier":["10.25669/fbjh-7x0f","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/1370","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/2369/viewcontent/uc.pdf"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:publisher":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"],"dc:rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["Salient features of contextual interference and knowledge of results"],"dc:type":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Kinesiology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science (MS)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:25:26Z"}