Whether a skill is open or closed does not have an established effect on mental simulation effectiveness¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2009 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The reviewed literature is inconclusive on whether open or closed skills are more, less or equally proficiently practiced through MS; some reviews find no significant difference while others contend MS suits unpredictable open skills. → Meer 2009

Evidence¶

Meer 2009¶

Meer, J.P. van & Theunissen, N.C.M. (2009). Prospective educational applications of mental simulation: A meta-review. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9097-8

q2 · i? · review · r2

Narrative synthesis of the consulted reviews: Feltz et al. report "no significant difference to be found between open and closed skills", while Suinn contends MS is proficient for skills with unpredictable elements; a compromise holds MS more effective for simple closed tasks unless the subject is familiar with the complex task.

"However, the investigated literature is inconclusive in determining whether open or closed skills are more, less or equally proficiently practiced through MS."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Mental simulation benefits cognitive tasks more than motor or strength tasks — related
• Novices risk practicing motor skills incorrectly with mental simulation, while experts benefit across task types — related
• Mental simulation practice improves performance relative to no practice, with reported effect sizes of 0.48 to 0.68 — a broader claim this one bears on