Randomized trial finds no difference in visuospatial serial memory across video playback speeds in young adults, challenging assumptions that slow motion enhances motor sequence learning.
While reducing video playback speed is theorized to lower cognitive load and enhance motor learning, current pedagogical research often infers these benefits from performance outcomes rather than isolating them through objective measurements of the learner's internal cognitive and physiological state. Therefore, this study investigated the effects of video playback speed on the immediate visuospatial serial memory (VSM) of a gymnastics sequence in young adults, specifically accounting for internal physiological and psychological factors including mood, fatigue, hunger, thirst, and baseline visuospatial working memory capacity. A total of 112 sports science students, aged 20.36 ± 1.01 years, were randomly assigned to one of three playback speed conditions: normal speed (NS), 0.75× speed (RS75), or 0.50× speed (RS50). Immediate visuospatial recall performance was assessed following a single viewing of a custom-designed video of a 21-movement floor routine. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in VSM across playback speeds in any of the five models after applying a global Bonferroni correction for multiple tests (adjusted threshold: α = 0.01). Notably, the group effect observed when adjusting for thirst ( p = 0.047) failed to reach this more stringent significance level. These findings challenge the assumption that slowed video playback inherently enhances cognitive processing and highlight the importance of internal learner states on immediate VSM. Practical implications suggest that reduced playback speeds did not offer a statistically significant advantage for the immediate VSM of gymnastics sequences compared with normal-speed playback under the current experimental conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Romdhani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: