Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25732095›Full record

Trial reportPsychonomic bulletin & review2015

Choose to move: The motivational impact of autonomy support on motor learning.

Rebecca Lewthwaite, Suzete Chiviacowsky, Ricardo Drews, Gabriele Wulf

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07028515 (Effects of Self-controlled Practice on Motor Learning and Motivation in People With Parkinson's Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07028515 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Self-controlled Practice on Motor Learning and Motivation in People With Parkinson's Disease

TypeobservationalSponsorNational Taiwan University HospitalRan2025 to 2027Enrolled72ConditionsParkinson Disease
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 175 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Motor learning in golf-a systematic review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024
    Review
  17. The Critical Period After Stroke Study (CPASS) Upper Extremity Treatment Protocol.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca LewthwaiteRancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center, Downey, CA, USA.
Suzete ChiviacowskyFederal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.
Ricardo DrewsFederal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.
Gabriele WulfDepartment of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, NV, 89154-3034, USA. gabriele.wulf@unlv.edu.
Universidade Federal de Pelotas · BRUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous studies in the motor learning domain have demonstrated learning advantages of self-controlled practice relative to yoked conditions. In separate lines of evidence in the social-psychological literature, findings show that providing participants with task-relevant autonomy support or minor incidental choices can result in superior outcomes when compared with conditions that thwart autonomy or do not offer choice. We hypothesized that motor learning could be enhanced by providing learners with choices - even if those choices are unrelated to task performance. In Experiment 1, two groups of participants practiced a golf putting task. While one group (the choice group) was able to select the color of golf balls (white, yellow, or orange) to be used in each upcoming block of 10 trials, participants in the second group (the yoked group) were provided with the same colored golf balls their choice-group counterparts had chosen. The results of a 24-h delayed retention test indicated significantly greater putting accuracy for the choice compared with the yoked group. Experiment 2 went one step further by asking choice group participants for their preferences regarding two issues unrelated to the practice task (balancing on a stabilometer): (1) which of two subsequent tasks (coincident timing or hand dynamometry) they wanted to perform and (2) which of two prints of paintings by Renoir they thought the investigator should hang on the laboratory wall. Yoked group participants were simply informed about which task they would perform afterwards and of which painting the experimenter would put on the wall. Balance learning was significantly more effective in the choice group on a retention test. Thus, self-controlled practice conditions can influence motor learning without providing task-relevant information, content, or strategic learning advantages. Self-controlled effects in motor learning may be motivational in nature, attributable to satisfaction of fundamental autonomy needs.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorMotivationPersonal AutonomyPractice, PsychologicalAdolescentColor PerceptionFemaleGolfHumansMaleMotor SkillsPostural BalanceRetention, PsychologyYoung AdultBalance learningChoiceFundamental psychological needsGolf puttingSelf-controlled practice

Identifiers

PMID25732095
OpenAlexW2000321557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.