getCITED   
  Home     Search     Add Content     Reports     Help  
Edit Publication | Edit Contributors | Delete Publication | Edit References | Edit Citations
Add to Bookstack | Show Bookstack | Change Bookstack

Teacher versus peer models revisited: effects on motor performance and self-efficacy

Post a Comment
CONTRIBUTORS:
  Author Lirgg, C. D. (University of Arkansas Fayetteville)
  Author Feltz, D. L. (Michigan State University)
JOURNAL:
  Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport (RQES), 62(2), 217 - 224.
YEAR: 1991
PUB TYPE: Journal Article
SUBJECT(S): motor-skill; learning; self-efficacy; imitation; physical-education
DISCIPLINE: No discipline assigned
HTTP: https://secure.sportquest.com/su.cfm?articleno=278113&title=278113
LANGUAGE: English
PUB ID: 103-342-133 (Last edited on 2002/02/27 18:44:08 US/Mountain)
SPONSOR(S):
 
ABSTRACT:
This study reinvestigated and extended the findings of Landers and Landers (1973), which examined the influence of skilled and unskilled teacher and peer models on motor performance. Sixth grade females (N = 100) were randomly assigned to groups in a 2 x 2 (Model Type x Model Skill) factorial design or to a no-model group. In the treatment groups, subjects observed one of four unfamiliar models -- (a) a skilled teacher, (b) an unskilled teacher, (c) a skilled peer, an unskilled peer--perform on the Bachman ladder task. Subjects performed 30 trials of the task and also completed self-efficacy questionnaires on three occasions. Results showed that subjects who watched a skilled model performed better than subjects who watched an unskilled model. Unlike the Landers and Landers study, no model type by model skill interaction was found. In addition, the skilled model group reported higher efficacy beliefs than the control group after performing and were more efficacious than the unskilled model subjects both after watching the model and after performing. These results suggest when students view unfamiliar models, the skill rather than the status of the model may be more salient.
STATISTICS
Click on # to view
 Citations   1 
 References  
 Comments  
 Quality      0/0.00 
 Interest      0/0.00 
 View(er)s   3/1015 
Quality
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Interest
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Prev | Next

    ABOUT getCITED   |    CONTACT US   |    USER INFO   |    PREFERENCES   |    PRIVACY   |    LOG IN   
Comments? Suggestions? Send them to feedback@getCITED.org.

Copyright © 2000-2013 getCITED Inc. All Rights Reserved.