Does Dyadic Practice Interfere with the Type of Motor Learning Promoted by Analogy Instructions?

We investigated whether allowing individuals to exchange verbal information during dyadic practice changed the effect of analogy instructions intended to strengthen explicit motor learning by an implicit means. Forty-three right-handed college students performed golf putting, aiming at a target three meters away. Participants were assigned to one of two groups: Dyadic Practice Analogy Instruction or Individual Practice Analogy Instruction. Participants in the Dyadic Practice group were allowed to communicate with one another about the task during their practice. Before practice, participants performed a working memory capacity test. Both groups performed 180 trials of golf distributed across three days. On each day, there were four blocks of 15 trials. On the third day, participants reported the explicit rules they used to learn the task and they completed the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. On the fourth day, they took three learning tests: retention, dual-task transfer, and social pressure transfer tests. Results of the retention test indicated that both groups learned the task comparably. Similarly, there were no significant group differences between the participants’ number of explicit rules learned and their motivation levels on either of the transfer tests. Finally, only the participants in the Dyadic Practice Analogy Group showed a significant correlation between their performance on the dual-task transfer test and their working memory capacity. Overall, we found that dyadic practice did not interfere with the implicit type of motor learning promoted by analogy instruction (i.e., implicit learning).