Document Type : Research Paper I Open Access I Released under CC BY-NC 4.0 license


1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Al zahra University, Tehran, Iran

2 MSc of Motor Behavior, Al zahra University, Tehran, Iran


The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of distribution of practice on the acquisition, retention with different intervals 1, 7, and also judgment of learning accuracy of forehand drive in table tennis. The 32 female student with 18- 24 years old that passed specialized table tennis unit, contributed as convicted. They randomly were divided to massed and distributed practice groups. The skill used in this study was the forehand drive. After pretest, the massed group practiced all 240 Trails in one session, and the distributed practice group practiced 60 trials per day on 4 consecutive days. After acquisition phase, Participants were asked to predict performance on the retention phase. Participants were asked, “what would you predict your average score on the first the retention test? “And then half of participants of each group contributed for a retention test 1 day later, half of other participants of each group contributed for retention test 7 days later. The data were analyzed by independent sample t test and two –way analysis of variants (ANOVA) with repeated test. The result showed significant differences between massed and distributed practice groups in the acquisition, retention (1, 7) test and also judgment of learning (p


1.   Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor learning and performance: From principles to application: Human Kinetics; 2013.
2.   Magill RA, Anderson DI. Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications. Edition 10th, editor. New York: McGraw-Hill New York; 2013.
3.   Donovan, J. J., & Radosevich, D. J. A meta-analytic review of the distribution of practice effect .Journal of Applied Psychology,1999; 84(5), 795–805
4. Leite, C. Ugrinowitsch, H. Carvalho,M.Benda,R.N distributionof Practice Affects Older, but not Young Adults’ Motor Skill. Human Movement Learning. 2013; 14(1):20-26
5.   Garcia J, Moreno F, Reina R, Menayo R, Fuentes J. Analysis of effects of distribution of practice in learning and retention of a continuous and a discrete skill presented on a computer. Perceptual and motor skills. 2008;107(1):261-72.
6.   Seabrook R, Brown GD, Solity JE. Distributed and massed practice: From laboratory to classroom. Applied cognitive psychology. 2005;19(1):107-22.
7.   Karni A, Meyer G, Rey-Hipolito C, Jezzard P, Adams MM, Turner R, et al. The acquisition of skilled motor performance: fast and slow experience-driven changes in primary motor cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1998;95(3):861-8.
8.   Simmons AL. Distributed practice and procedural memory consolidation in musicians’ skill learning. Journal of Research in Music Education. 2012;59(4):357-68.
9.   Dail TK, Christina RW. Distribution of practice and metacognition in learning and long-term retention of a discrete motor task. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2004;75(2):148-55.
10. Simon DA, Bjork RA. Metacognition in motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2001;27(4):907.
11. Seif AA. Modern educational Psychology. Psychology of learning and Instruction. Edition 7th, editor. Tehran: Doran 2015.
12. Son LK, Simon DA. Distributed learning: Data, metacognition, and educational implications. Educational Psychology Review. 2012;24(3):379-99.
13. Kornell N, Bjork RA. Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the “enemy of induction”? Psychological science. 2008;19(6):585-92.
14. Kornell N, Son LK. Learners’ choices and beliefs about self-testing. Memory. 2009;17(5):493-501.
15. Vlach HA, Bredemann CA, Kraft C. To mass or space? Young children do not possess adults’ incorrect biases about spaced learning. Journal of experimental child psychology. 2019;183:115-33.
16. Baddeley AD, Longman D. The influence of length and frequency of training session on the rate of learning to type. Ergonomics. 1978;21(8):627-35.
17. Liao C-M, Masters RS. Analogy learning: A means to implicit motor learning. Journal of sports sciences. 2001;19(5):307-19.
18. Sadeghian shahi M, Rahavi R, Abootalebi N, Moshiri-Sedeh P. The effects of the self-talk types and task complexity on the accuracy of forehand top spin of advanced players. 15th ITTF Sports Science Congress; Düsseldorf, Germany2017.
19. Delaney PF, Verkoeijen PP, Spirgel A. Spacing and testing effects: A deeply critical, lengthy, and at times discursive review of the literature. Psychology of learning and motivation. 53: Elsevier; 2010. p. 63-147.
20. Son LK. Metacognitive control and the spacing effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2010;36(1):255.
21. Aghdasi MT, Jourkesh M. Comparing the effect of massed & distributed practice in different stages of discrete motor task learning. Sport Science. 2011;4(1).
22. Shea CH, Lai Q, Black C, Park J-H. Spacing practice sessions across days benefits the learning of motor skills. Human movement science. 2000;19(5):737-60.
23. Commins S, Cunningham L, Harvey D, Walsh D. Massed but not spaced training impairs spatial memory. Behavioural brain research. 2003;139(1-2):215-23.
24. Barzagar Nazari K, Ebersbach M. Distributing mathematical practice of third and seventh graders: A pplicability of the spacing effect in the classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2019;33(2):288-98.
25. Rohrer D, Taylor K. The effects of overlearning and distributed practise on the retention of mathematics knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 2006;20(9):1209-24.
26. Robertson EM, Pascual-Leone A, Miall RC. Current concepts in procedural consolidation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2004;5(7):576.
27. Kantak SS, Sullivan KJ, Fisher BE, Knowlton BJ, Winstein CJ. Transfer of motor learning engages specific neural substrates during motor memory consolidation dependent on the practice structure. Journal of motor behavior. 2011;43(6):499-507.
28. Wang D, Li T, Yang G, Zhang Y. Effects of Concurrent and Delayed Visual Feedback on Motor Memory Consolidation. IEEE transactions on haptics. 2017;10(3):350-7.
29. McCabe J. Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition. 2011;39(3):462-76.
30. Metcalfe J, Kornell N, Son LK. A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 2007;19(4-5):743-68.
31. Theodosiou A, Papaioannou A. Motivational climate, achievement goals and metacognitive activity in physical education and exercise involvement in out-of-school settings. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2006;7(4):361-79.
32. Shamsi Pourdeh Kordi P, Abdoli B, Ashayeri H, Namazizadeh M. The effect of different training intervals on the processing of consolidation based on promotion of hidden motor memory. Journal of Shahrekord University of medical sciences. 2014;16(3):95-107.
33. Kazemi F, Yektayar M, Abad AMB. Investigation the impact of chess play on developing meta-cognitive ability and math problem-solving power of students at different levels of education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012;32:372-9.
34. Rahavi R, Stiri Z. The Effect of Individuals’ Perception of Type of Task on Determination of Contextual Interference Levels. Journal of Motor Learning and Movement. 2013;5(1):139-54.
35. Zimmerman BJ. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American educational research journal. 2008;45(1):166-83.
36. Agustiani H, Cahyad S, Musa M. Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of students academic performance. The Open Psychology Journal. 2016;9(1).