New accepted paper by @kearney_phil, from @PessLimerick 🇮🇪, with @FrankNugent10 & Curran, who conducted a systematic review of manipulation checks in focus of attention research finding 53% did not use a manipulation check & they also provide seven suggestions for future research
A new pub (2nd author) from my previous postdoc! Even with indirect and minor impacts on your head, damage to the brain can accumulate, and we could observe the changes in movement variability with a cost-effective method, such as a smartphone.
https://t.co/Dce1R0Jnh6
Given the complexity of human behavior, it is hard to believe that one intervention can hugely change people at the outcome level. My take home message is NOT EF is garbage. Rather, researchers need to do a realistic sample size estimation with approaches that minimize biases.
Congrats @bradmckay8. I was waiting for this to be published for so long, though I already cited many times when this was in press. A meta-analysis that showed that the effect size of external focus was small when publication bias was assumed.
https://t.co/zeq0FVNbGZ
New pub! The first registered report AND blind study in motor control/learning or sports psych. It is an accepted proposal of a study that will examine the effect of attentional focus and an individual's imagery ability.
https://t.co/gDOEaBUIWD
@melb4886 @DrRChadwick @FernandoPhysics I agree. It should never be a gap in the literature because someone failed or simply something hasn’t been done. It should always be a gap in the literature so that your study refute/support/develop an existing theory. The given is not right in the first place.
New pub! We tested whether external/internal focus (EF/IF) can affect performance when practicing a skill only with imagery in the absence of overt movements. We didn’t find a statistical difference.
https://t.co/MGoQ9Yc8cU
A new pub! We showed bimanual coordination changes by goal perceptions. Also, we also found that bimanual coordination of post-stroke patients was different by the side of hemisphere and sex.
https://t.co/eTWfzIqlIs
Why is motor learning and control are taught in the same course? 🧐 I’ve always thought biomechanics and motor control should be taught as one course. A combination of motor learning and development would work better. Well, that’s how my brain is organized, I guess.
Now, I feel I was doing research projects because it was my comfort zone. I must ‘show’ students by being in an uncomfortable zone and continuing to challenge myself in order to challenge them to feel comfortable being in their uncomfortable zone (3/3).
For my motor learning class, I did Implementation Project. This task involved observing practitioners, examining motor learning strategies (attention, augmented feedback, CI, etc.), and concluding the presentation with actionable recommendations for coaches. (1/3)
It was more valuable than ‘traditional’ projects, such as literature review presentations or mini-research presentations, which can actually foster bad habits of small sample sizes and flawed decision-making. Teaching how to translate knowledge is so critical for students. (2/3)
Maybe the most useful data in decades. Amazing work to have this sample size with consistent study designs and methodologies. All motor learning, control, or biomechanics researchers and teachers should take a look at it.
https://t.co/EBha5JN5st
Or inserting whole between part practice? That is, embedding the contextual interference topic within the part-whole practice topic. Please someone do the research lol (2/2).
When you observe any sports, coaches generally do part practice drills (eg. Basketball fast break practice of 5 on 0 -> 5 on 2) and then do a whole (5 on 5). For skilled athletes, what if you start with a whole, let them figure out, then, do part practices? (1/2)