Browsing by Subject "observational learning"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item The after-action review training approach: an integrative framework and empirical investigation(2009-05-15) Villado, Anton JamesThe after?action review (AAR; also known as the after?event review or debriefing) is a training approach that is based on reviews of trainees? performance on recently completed tasks or performance events. Used by the military for decades, the use of AAR?based training has increased dramatically in recent years. Empirical research investigating AARs, however, is almost non?existent, and theoretical work on the effectiveness AAR?based training and the underlying processes have been limited. The present study presents a theoretical framework for the AAR by integrating the AAR into the existing training literature. In addition, this study presents an empirical evaluation of the effectiveness of AAR?based training, and an investigation of whether objective AAR?based training is more effective than subjective AAR?based training. One?hundred twenty individuals were trained in 30 4?person teams on a cognitively complex performance task. Teams were trained using a non?AAR?, subjective AAR?, or objective AAR?based training approach. Declarative knowledge, team performance, and team?efficacy served as the measures of training effectiveness. It was hypothesized that AAR?based training (subjective AAR? and objective AAR? based training combined) would be more effective than non?AAR?based training. Further, it was hypothesized that objective AAR?based training would be more effective than subjective AAR?based training. The study results indicated that AAR?based training was more effective than the non?AAR?based training approach in terms of team performance and team?efficacy, but not team declarative knowledge. Objective AAR?based training was no more effective than subjective AAR?based training. Teams performed equally well on the training outcome measures regardless of whether they used an objective or subjective AAR? based training approach. It is anticipated that the theoretical framework and empirical results of this study will serve as a catalyst for the integration of AAR?based training into existing training literatures and to inform the design and practice of AAR?based training systems to take full advantage of their efficacy as training interventions.Item The effect of task structure, practice schedule, and model type on the learning of relative and absolute timing by physical and observational practice(Texas A&M University, 2004-11-15) Black, Charles BeyerThree experiments compared learning of relative and absolute timing of a sequential key-pressing task by physical and observational practice. Experiment 1 compared a task with a complex internal structure (goal proportions of 22.2, 44.4, 33.4 on the three movement segments) to one with a simpler structure (goal proportions of 33.3, 33.3, 33.4). Observers only learned the relative timing as well as physical practicers when the internal structure was simple, but learned the absolute timing in both conditions. Experiment 2 compared variable (700, 900, and 1100 ms overall time) with constant practice (900 ms overall time). Observers of constant practice models learned the relative timing better than no-practice control participants, but not as well as the models, while observers of variable practice models learned the relative timing no better than the control group. Observers in both practice conditions were able to produce the absolute timing as well as those who physically practiced. In Experiment 3 observers of an expert model were able to produce the relative timing as well as those who physically practiced the skill, while those who observed learning models were not. All observers and the physical practice participants were able to produce the overall duration as well as the expert model. The results of these three experiments support earlier findings that increasing stability during practice promotes better learning of relative timing, but that absolute timing can be learned under less-stable conditions (Lai, Shea, Wulf, & Wright, 2000b). These findings also have important implications on the limitations of Scully and Newells' (1985) prediction that relative timing, but not absolute timing, could be learned by observation. Experiments 1-3 along with earlier findings (Black & Wright, 2000) have consistently found that absolute timing could be learned by observers even as the nature of the task, practice schedule, and model are manipulated. Furthermore, the results suggest a limitation to the effectiveness of learning models (Adams, 1986; McCullagh & Caird, 1990).