Motor Learning Conundrums (and Possible Solutions)

What value is there in effective practice regimes if these same regimes do not, in themselves, engage the learner to continue to practice? This question was discussed in the context of two practice schedules that have been shown to be effective in studies of motor learning. But recent evidence has found these practice schedules to be either inefficient in their use of practice time (distributed practice), or results in metacognitive judgments of incompetence (random practice). We discuss these conundrums, possible ramifications relative to the law of practice, and potential resolutions of these issues by recent research efforts. Although many variables influence how skill improves, no single variable is a stronger predictor of motor skill learning in adults than the amount of practice. Immediate and dramatic improvements in motor performance occur typically in the initial stages of practice, followed by smaller gains later on. That such effects are seen in most adults is rarely questioned and, in fact, have been mathematically described in terms of a power function and referred to as the Law of Practice (e.g.