As motor learning in individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) has been poorly elucidated, this study aimed to apply an acute aerobic exercise (AE), well-known intervention favorable to motor learning in typically developing individuals, to assist people with ID in motor learning, and examine its underlying mechanisms via EF and EEG assessments. 17 adults with ID (11 males, aged 31.41 ± 9.7, & mental aged 7.69 ± 3.06) participated in this within-group counterbalanced study. They participated in 2 interventions, a vigorous treadmill walking (AE) or seated rest (CON) condition, with having a month of wash-out period in between interventions. The pre-test, post-test, 24-hour retention test, and 7-day retention test was administered, and each testing phase administered a golf putt performance under both original (i.e., with guideline) and transfer putt tasks (i.e., without guideline), EF (i.e., Knock and Tap test, forward and backward Digit span test, forward and backward Corsi block test), and resting EEG assessment. Golf putting accuracy in post-test was not significantly different from the pre-test; however, the putt accuracy under the transfer putt task indicated an interaction effect at 24-hour retention test phase compared to pre-test, F(1, 32) = 5.26, p = .03, ηp2 = .14, and paired t-test indicated a near significant improvement in putt accuracy in AE (p = .07), but not in CON condition (p = .23). The pre-test and 7-day retention phases did not indicate a significant effect on golf putt skill. As EF variables and resting EEG temporal alpha asymmetry (TAA) remained unchanged throughout the procedure, underlying mechanisms of change in putt skill need to be further investigated. This study revealed a trend that the AE positively influenced golf putt accuracy and offline motor memory consolidation at 24-hour retention phase, but the effects were not statistically significant. Given that the study procedure did not include practice blocks, the observed positive impact of AE on golf putt accuracy is promising; thus, a future study is recommended to further verify the benefit of AE on motor learning in individuals with ID, as well as with rigorous EF and EEG measures to elucidate possible underlying mechanisms of AE-dependent improvement in motor skill.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) is a type of motor speech disorder (MSD) characterized by deficits in the motor planning or programming of speech movements (Duffy, 2005). Because AOS is often a chronic condition that may severely impair intelligibility and, thus, significantly reduce quality of life (Ballard et al., 2015), it is necessary to develop efficient and effective treatment protocols. A previous study by Youmans, Youmans, and Hancock (2011), demonstrated the efficacy of script training in the treatment of AOS. Furthermore, extensive research in general motor learning has shown that feedback is one of the most important components of motor learning (Schmidt & Lee, 2011). Research devoted specifically to speech motor learning has generally favored this view, though few studies have distinguished between the two major types of feedback: feedback providing knowledge of results (KR) and feedback providing knowledge of performance (KP). The present study is the first to examine feedback type in treatment for AOS, and the first to examine the utility of script training specifically for a participant with AOS, but no aphasia. The findings from this single-case experimental design study reveal that, compared to KR, KP resulted in greater improvements in speaking rate. KR and KP feedback resulted in comparable gains for accuracy, but condition differences were difficult to interpret due to unexpected rising baselines for the KR scripts. Both KR and KP scripts, but especially the KP scripts, outperformed the untreated control scripts, providing further support for the efficacy of script training for AOS. / Communication Sciences

<p> Increasing evidence indicates that giving individuals control over their practice schedule facilitates motor learning (Titzer, Shea, & Romack, 1993; Wu & Magill, 2004, 2005). A recent study within cognitive psychology (Son, 2004) found that individuals massed practice on tasks they judged as hard but spaced practice on tasks they judged as easy. The purpose of this experiment was to examine how self-regulated practice impacts motor learning and the strategies used by individuals as a function of task complexity. Participants were required to move a mouse-driven cursor through a pattern of coloured squares, pausing only long enough in each square to make an appropriate button press (white square=left button, black square=right button). Task complexity (4 easy and 4 hard patterns) was determined by the combined effects of the arrangement of the grid of squares and the hand used to manipulate the mouse (easy =dominant hand, hard=non-dominant hand). Participants were randomly assigned to one of eight groups: blocked, random, self-regulated, and yoked to self-regulated, performing either the easy or hard tasks. The number of switches between patterns were recorded as well as temporal and accuracy measures. The self-regulated groups were ineffective in acquisition, but showed the most stable and improved performance in retention, irrespective of task difficulty. Moreover, although switch strategies of the self-regulated groups differed between and within task complexity, the motor learning advantage was generalized. Taken together, these results reveal that an individual's strategic approach to practice may change as a function of task complexity, with no detriment to motor learning and adds to the growing body of literature that suggests self-regulated practice is an important variable for effective motor learning.</p> / Thesis / Master of Science (MSc)

<p>This study examined the effects of self-controlled and performance-based feedback schedules on the acquisition and retention of a novel motor task. In Experiment 1 participants performed an interception task on a computer using a mouse-controlled cursor. The goal of the task was to intercept the image of a red circle as it passed through a designated area. Each trial received a score based on the speed and accuracy of the interception movement. Participants were randomly assigned to three feedback groups: Best-trial feedback, Worst-trial feedback, and Self-controlled feedback. No differences were found between groups in acquisition, however analysis of no-feedback retention and transfer tests indicated that the Worst-trial group showed the most significant improvements in performance. Experiment 2 examined the potential mechanisms contributing to the advantages of a worst-trial feedback schedule. Participants in the second experiment performed the same interception task utilized in Experiment 1 under two novel feedback conditions: Estimation feedback and Immediate feedback. These new groups were compared to the Worst-trial group from Experiment 1. Analysis of no-feedback retention and transfer tests again indicated that the Worst-trial group showed the most significant improvements in performance. These results suggest that self-controlled schedules may not be ideal when feedback is based on performance; instead, specific error information for the least successful trials appear to be most beneficial, especially when individuals have knowledge of results regarding previous attempts at the task.</p> / Thesis / Master of Science (MSc)