Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 19, 2026
05:12
Using Virtual Reality to Transfer Motor Skill Knowledge from One Hand to Another
Published on: September 18, 2017
On No-KR tests in motor learning, retention and transfer
Daniel M Russell1, Karl M Newell
1The Pennsylvania State University - Berks, Division of Science, P.O. Box 7009, Tulpehocken Road, Reading, PA 19610, United States. dmr18@psu.edu
Human Movement Science
|October 20, 2006
Summary
No-knowledge of results (KR) tests are not essential for motor learning research. Their role is limited, especially when outcome information is readily available, challenging current interpretations of KR research.
Area of Science:
- Motor control and learning
- Cognitive psychology
- Human movement science
Background:
- Knowledge of Results (KR) is crucial in motor learning studies.
- No-KR tests are often used to assess motor learning, retention, and transfer.
- Current interpretations of KR research may be too narrow.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine the role and necessity of No-Knowledge of Results (KR) tests in motor learning.
- To challenge the prevailing view that No-KR tests are essential for motor learning research.
- To propose a broader interpretation of KR and its implications for motor learning studies.
Main Methods:
- Distinction between studies focusing on KR and those using No-KR tests.
- Analysis of arguments for and against the essential role of No-KR tests.
- Illustration of perspectives with experimental examples.
Main Results:
- No-KR tests are not universally essential for motor learning, retention, and transfer.
- Their relevance is highest when outcome information is not naturally available.
- A restrictive view of KR as only augmented outcome information limits research scope.
Conclusions:
- The essential role of No-KR tests in motor learning research is questioned.
- A broader perspective on KR is needed to advance the field of motor learning.
- Experimental evidence supports a nuanced view of No-KR tests' utility.
