This article was downloaded by: [University of Auckland Library]

On: 16 February 2015, At: 20:55

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sports Sciences

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20

The effect of video‐modelling and

video‐feedback on the learning of the
tennis service by novices
a a a a
H. H. Emmen , L. G. Wesseling , R. J. Bootsma , H. T. A. Whiting
a
& P. C. W. van Wieringen
a
Department of Psychology, Interfaculty of Human Movement Science ,
Vrije Universiteit , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Published online: 14 Nov 2007.

To cite this article: H. H. Emmen , L. G. Wesseling , R. J. Bootsma , H. T. A. Whiting & P. C. W. van

Wieringen (1985) The effect of video‐modelling and video‐feedback on the learning of the tennis service
by novices, Journal of Sports Sciences, 3:2, 127-138, DOI: 10.1080/02640418508729742

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640418508729742

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our
agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the
accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views
of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon
and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis
shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses,
damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and
use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Journal of Sports Sciences, 1985, 3, 127-138

The effect of video-modelling and video-feedback

on the learning of the tennis service by novices
H.H. EMMEN, L.G. WESSELING, R.J. BOOTSMA, H.T.A. WHITING and
P.C.W. VAN WIERINGEN
Department of Psychology, Interfaculty of Human Movement Science, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

Accepted 11 June 1985

Abstract

This project is addressed to the effectiveness of video mediated instruction on the learning of the tennis
service by novices. The research was carried out in an indoor tennis hall under normal training conditions.
Three experimental groups were used: a video-model (VMT), a video-feedback (VFT) and a group with a
combination of video modelling and video feedback (VMFT). Two control groups - based on different
training periods - were also used: a traditional training group (TT1) which practised for a period of
45 min per training session and a second traditional training group (TT2) which practised for a period of
only 30 min per training session. All subjects took part in five successive training sessions. No clear
advantages of using video mediated instruction methods in teaching novices the tennis service could be
demonstrated. Five sessions of 30 min practical training were shown to be as effective as five sessions of
45 min practical training in producing improvements in both form and achievement scores of novice tennis
players. While, in the early stages, form and achievement scores were not shown to be significantly related,
after five sessions a significant correlation (P<0.05) was shown.

Keywords: Video-feedback, tennis service, modelling.

Introduction

The popularity of the video recorder in the field of human performance (particularly that of
sport), since its inception, is self-evident. Reasons for this are not hard to find. Not only does it
provide possibilities for long-term storage of information about sporting events, but, perhaps
more importantly, it is claimed to have positive advantages in the acquisition of skill.
No matter what general method of approach to the teaching of movement skills is adopted,
there will usually come a time when a teacher or coach deems it necessary to provide a model
(usually by means of demonstration) that the learner can utilize in developing a particular
movement form. The advantage of such procedures is, as Holding (1965) suggested, that by such
0264-0414/85 $03.00 +.12 © 1985 E. & F.N. Spon Ltd.
 128 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

means it is possible to considerably reduce the field of possible actions in the early stages of
learning. The alternative is reliance on 'discovery methods' of learning in which skills are
acquired - almost fortuitously - in relatively unstructured situations. While such methods are
not necessarily to be decried, the existence of elaborate teaching and coaching systems is
evidence that more efficient procedures are available. Even in discovery learning situations,
some 'imitation' or 'catching' of the movement characteristics of significant others will usually
take place. This is only to appreciate that the learning of complex motor actions is essentially a
socially mediated process in which a teacher normally plays an important role. A failure to come
to terms with this fact is one of the reasons that, in spite of close on a century of the most
elaborate laboratory experimentation and attention to the learning process, the contribution of
such findings to the applied field of learning has been very limited.
Over the efficacy of models in comparison with verbal instructions there are considerable
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

differences of opinion (Ungerer, 1973; Volpert, 1973; Robb, 1972; Burwitz, 1981). Authors such
as Robb (1972) have, however, suggested that verbal instructions have an important bearing on
the effectiveness of model demonstrations. Burwitz (1981) indicated that it is only in those
research projects in which subjects are required to pay attention to what are considered to be
essential aspects of the movement, that positive effects of video-demonstration are confirmed.
This is a possible explanation of the different findings encountered in the literature with respect
to the learning of motor skills through the medium of model demonstrations (Lockhart, 1944;
Gray and Brumbach, 1967; Londeree, 1967; Landers and Landers, 1973; Landers, 1975; Feltz
and Landers, 1977; Feltz, 1982; Sims and Manz, 1982 showed positive effects of demonstrations
while Brown and Messerschmith, 1948; Murnin et«/., 1970; Nelson, 1958; Martens et al., 1976;
showed no, or only negative effects, of demonstrations).
Burwitz (1981) raised the issue of lack of control in some of the field studies carried out. For
example, prior experience of subjects on a particular task and opportunities for subjects to train
between experimental sessions are often not controlled.
The use of video as ^feedback technique has also produced conflicting results in the literature.
In an overview of some 51 studies (Rothstein and Arnold, 1976) 19 showed a positive effect of
video-feedback on learning. In the other 32 studies no, or sometimes negative effects, were
found. While the number of different tests used (18) and the methodologies invoked in these
studies, do not allow a clear explanation of these discrepancies, Rothstein and Arnold (1976)
proposed that:
1. Positive effects are only to be expected, if at all, after a minimum period of five weeks
training with video.
2. Video-feedback, when verbal cues are not provided, is more appropriate for players with a
high skill level than for those with a lower.
3. Better results from video-feedback will be obtained if, through instruction, attention is
directed to the most relevant aspects of the video displays.
These authors however, only produced limited evidence to support their contentions. With
respect to the second and third propositions, Hegmann (1974) pointed out that for the tennis
service it makes no difference whether verbal cues are, or are not, provided.
The criterion tasks used in video studies have also come in for their share of critical
comment. Del Rey (1971), for example, suggested that better results are to be expected when
 The tennis serve and video-modelling 129

video-feedback is used in the learning of'closed' rather than 'open' skills. Cooper and Rothstein
(1981) produced some support for this contention in showing that a relatively closed skill (tennis
service) can be better learned by giving video-feedback about the movement carried out, while
relatively open skills (forehand and backhand in tennis) can be better learned by giving feedback
about both the result of the movement and the movement itself. The provision of both methods
of feedback interspersed can, according to these authors, lead to the best results for both open
and closed skills. It needs, however, to be stated that the findings of Cooper and Rothstein were
based only on information about the 'result' of the movement (position and speed of the ball) as
determined by the Hewitt Tennis Test (Hewitt, 1966). It is doubtful if the achievement measure
used is also appropriate for determination of the technical (form of the movement) performance.
Only when a linear relationship between 'form' and 'result' is found to exist would such a
conclusion be justified.
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

That this is not necessarily the case is to be concluded from an investigation by den Brinker
(1971) into the effect of video-feedback on the technique and performance of speed skaters. The
group receiving video-feedback was shown to develop a better technique than the group
without, while performance, as indexed by skating speed, was not significantly different between
the groups.
In addition to the provision of model movements by the use of video or the provision of video-
feedback, a combination of both instruction methods is possible. Keele (1977) proposed that
video-feedback needs to be combined with the simultaneous provision of a model (template). It
is then possible for the learner to accurately check his movements against those of the
movements of the model.
Rikli and Smith (1980) researched the efficacy of such a combination of methods on .the
learning of the tennis service differentiating, at the same time in this respect, between two
different levels of skill - 'advanced beginners' and 'intermediate' tennis players. They were able
to show that the group with the combined video-feedback/video-model training had a
significantly better tennis service form than a control group. They were, however, unable to
differentiate between the efficacy for different levels of skill since it was clear, at the beginning of
the experiment, that the groups did not differ significantly in terms of the form of their tennis
service. They also failed to provide data with respect to validity and reliability of the appraisal
list on which basis their data were derived. Attention to the form/achievement relationship was
not a subject of analysis in their study.
In a study by Ross et al. (1985) a combined video-feedback/video-model training (in which
the correct model and the video-feedback followed one another rather than being presented
simultaneously) was compared with a video-feedback training, a video-model training (in which
demonstration of the correct movement was presented) and a discovery learning paradigm. The
laboratory task involved the knocking over, in correct order, of a series of seven vertical
obstacles. In addition, a time criterion of 2100 ms was prescribed. On the basis of deviations
from the 2100 ms the authors concluded that the video-model training led to better achievement
scores than the discovery learning. The provision of a correct model (video-model training)
produced a better result than giving video-feedback training. It was further concluded that the
presentation of a model followed by video-feedback has a disturbing effect since this group had
the worst results.
Cognisant of the signalled shortcomings in the literature, the present research is directed
 130 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

towards the effectiveness of video mediated instruction in the learning of the tennis service by
beginners. In contrast to the work of Rikli and Smith (1980) both a measure of the form of the
service as well as an achievement measure were used as dependent variables. Also, following the
work of Ross et al. (1985) the experimental (video instruction) group comprised a video model
training group (VMT), a video-feedback training group (VFT) and a group with a combination
of video-modelling and video-feedback (VMFT). Two control groups, based on training periods
differing in length were used. In the first group (Traditional training 1, TT1) more time - 45 min
i.e. equivalent to the total time available in each of the video conditions - was available for
carrying out the 'service' task than in the second group (Traditional training 2, TT2) - 30 min
i.e. equivalent to the total physical practice time available in each of the video conditions. The
existing literature gave rise to the following expectations:
1. Better form and higher achievement scores from the experimental groups (VMT, VFT,
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

VMFT) in comparison to the control groups (TT1, TT2).

2. Better form and higher achievement scores from the VMT group in comparison to the VFT
and VMFT group.
3. Better form and higher achievement scores from the VFT group in comparison to the
VMFT group.
Additionally, it was anticipated that the TT1 group as a consequence of a longer overall
period of training would achieve significantly better form and achievement scores than group
TT2. A further major consideration in the present study was the form/achievement
relationship - a relationship which received no attention in the study of Rikli and Smith (1980).
The prediction was that the correlation between these these two variables would increase as
training proceeded. No predictions were made about differential effects, in this respect, under
the different conditions.

Experimental methods

Subjects
The subjects taking part in this research project were recruited by means of an advertisement in
a local paper. Subjects older than 18 yr, without tennis experience and interested in learning the
tennis service free of charge, were solicited. The final sample of 40 subjects (20 male and
20 female) ranged in age from 18-60 years (X = 36.2 ;S.D. = 12.9). Five groups of 8 subjects were
formed by making use of a matching procedure based on sex and initial movement form as
measured during a test prior to the experiment proper. This resulted in groups of four male and
four female subjects each, with no significant differences in movement form between the groups.
Moreover, subsequent checks revealed that no significant differences existed with respect to age
or initial achievement scores.

Conditions
Group 1. Traditional training 1 (TT1), consisted of 5 training sessions each of 45 min duration.
During these training periods the service was the central concern and training followed the
 The tennis serve and video-modelling 131

guidelines laid down by the Royal Dutch Lawn Tennis Association. This implies that live
demonstrations of the service were presented by the trainers.

Group 2. Video model training (VMT), consisted of 5 training sessions each of 45 min. Each
session was made up of two stages: (a) 15 min, observation and explanation (by the trainer) of a
model service. This model was presented by means of a video demonstration tape and consisted
of 16 services performed by an expert; (b) 30 min, the subjects trained in the same way as those of
Group 1 (TT1). It should be noted in this respect that they had less time available than Group 1
for this part of their training.

Group 3. Video-feedback training (VFT), consisted of 5 training sessions each of 45 min. Each
session was made up of two stages: (a) 15 min, discussion of the video recordings of their own
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

services by the coach and pupil. During a session 5 services were, on average, recorded. These
recordings were discussed and analysed both at the end of a session and at the beginning of the
following session. This meant that sessions 2,3,4 and 5 began with discussion and analysis of the
recordings made in sessions 1,2,3 and 4, respectively. In the first session, the 15 min were spent
entirely on discussion and analysis of the recordings made in that session; (b) 30 min, the
subjects trained in the same way as did those in Group 1. It should be noted in this respect that
they had less time available than Group 1 for this part of their training.

Group 4. Video model-feedback-training (VMFT) was a combination of the VMT and VFT
conditions. Subjects took part in 5 training sessions each of 45 min. Each session was made up of
2 stages: (a) 15 min, observation and discussion of the model service (see VMT condition) and
the discussion and analysis of video recordings of pupil's own services (see VFT condition); (b)
30 min, the subjects trained in the same way as did those in Group 1. It should be noted in this
respect that they had less time available than Group 1 for this part of their training.

Group 5. Traditional training 2 (TT2), consisted of 5 training sessions each of 30 min duration
(i.e. the same amount of time was available for practical training as in groups VMT, VFT and
VMFT) consisting entirely of practical training: the lessons were given in the same manner as
for the TT1 condition but, of course, less time was available.

Criterion task
In addition to the training, the subjects received a pre-test, between-test and post-test. The pre-
test was taken four days prior to the first lesson and the post-test four days after the fifth, and
last, lesson. The between-test occurred between the third and fourth lessons. The subjects were
required, for each test, to carry out 15 services. They had to serve the ball from the left side of the
court so that it passed under a 2.12 metre high stretched rope, in the direction of the right hand
service area of their opponent's court.
Before carrying out the pre-test the subjects were required to look at the service as
demonstrated by a video model. This 'model' service was carried out by an expert and was
displayed on a video monitor. (On the basis of a technique appraisal the expert scored 72 out of a
possible 80 points.) Via the monitor, 16 services were shown, four from each of four different
 132 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

positions - one from the right side of the court level with the baseline, one from directly behind
the server and two from the front (left-oblique, right-oblique).

Instructions
The following instructions were given to the subjects: try to serve the ball into the right service
area with as good a technique as possible. If the ball passes under the rope and falls within this
service area, 2 points will be awarded. If it passes under the cord but does not fall into the service
cord, only 1 point. In all other situations no points will be awarded. The number of points,
however, is a secondary consideration. What is more important is a good technique in carrying
out the service. In total you will be required to make 15 services and these will be video-
recorded.
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

Achievement score
The achievement scores, derived from the Hewitt (1966) tennis test were arrived at by summing
the separate scores for the services. From the 15 services carried out in the pre-test, between-test
and post-test, only services 4-13 were analysed. Thus, the subjects could receive for each test, a
score ranging from 0-20 points.

Form score
The video records made during the pre-test, between-test and post-test were arranged in
random order and then appraised by two trained observers. For this purpose the observers had
at their disposal the so-called 'service observation list' (SOL). The list, developed in a previous
study (Emmen and Wesseling, 1984), comprised 16 items, each of which had reference to a
different aspect of the service. Appraisals were made on the basis of a 5 point scale. Thus, per
test, the subjects could receive a form score of 16 minimum and 80 maximum. The item
appraisals were based on 10 successive services. If any of the items was difficult to appraise,
because, for example, of great variability, the appraisal was restricted to the last three services
carried out by the subject. For the purpose of making the appraisal the two observers were
allowed to re-run the video recordings, stop them at any position or run them in slow-motion.
The inter-observer reliability for the pre-test was 0.92, for the between-test and post-test 0.89.
The validity of the SOL was determined by comparing the scores of the trained observers
(obtained by use of the SOL) with those of the two experts from the Royal Dutch Lawn Tennis
Association who made 'global' appraisals on a ten point scale. Correlations of 0.81 (pre-test),
0.82 (between-test) and 0.78 (post-test) were considered to be acceptably high.

Trainers
Each session was directed by two qualified tennis coaches, both in possession of senior
qualifications. The sessions were given on 5 successive Friday afternoons. The training sessions
took place on 2 indoor courts next to each other. On each of the courts one coach and 4 subjects
 The tennis serve and video-modelling 133

from one condition (2 male and 2 female) trained at any one time. Both coaches taught under all
five conditions but, within a condition, they, necessarily, taught different groups of subjects.

Apparatus
During the training sessions for the VMT, VFT and VMFT conditions use was made of a
Nordmende colour cine camera (C540), a Nordmende video recorder (V55O) and Nordmende
colour monitor (1434) with a screen of 36 cm (diagonal). For appraising the video recording of
the subjects by the two observers, use was made of a Sony video recorder (L-C9ES) and a Sony
colour monitor (trinitron) with a screen of 64 cm (diagonal).
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

Results

Achievement scores
In Table 1 the achievement scores are presented for the pre-test, between-test and post-test
under the five training conditions. Fig. 1 presents the same results graphically.
An ANOVA (conditions (5) x trainers (2) x tests (3)) showed only a significant main effect
[ F (2.60) = 7.93; P< 0.001] for test sessions. This implied that over the three test sessions
significant progress was made in terms of the achievement scores. The absence of a significant
interaction between tests and conditions [ F (8.60)=0.49] shows such progress to be
independent of training condition. A non-significant interaction between tests and trainers
[F (2.60)= 1.80; P>0.05] confirms that the use of two different trainers did not have a
confounding effect.

Table 1. Means and standard deviations of achievement scores for the five conditions during the
pre-test, between-test and post-test.
T T 1 , .!V = 8 VMT, N = 8 VFT, i!V = 8 VMFT, JV = 8 TT2, JV = 8
Condition X S.D. X S.D. X S.D. X S.D. X S.D.
Pre-test 4.8 2.8 5.8 4.3 7.1 4.5 5.6 4.2 7.1 3.5
Between-test 7.5 1.7 6.3 3.3 7.5 3.0 6.4 5.2 6.6 2.1
Post-test 8.6 2.5 8.5 3.3 8.6 3.3 7.5 3.3 9.3 3.4

Form scores
In Table 2, the form scores are presented for the pre-tests, between-tests and post-tests under the
five training conditions. Fig. 2 presents the same results graphically.
An ANOVA (conditions (5) x trainers (2) x tests (3)) produced similar results to those of the
achievement scores analysis i.e. a clear training effect [ F (2.60) = 68.44; P<0.001] independent
of condition [F (8.60)= 1.39; P>0.05] and trainer [F (2.60) = 0.75].
 134 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

10

UJ
0* 8
o
u
tn
i- 7
UJ
LU
> 6
UJ
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

a:
u
cr 5 « o TT1
B- a VMT
* * VFT
» o VMFT
x- *TT2

PRE BETWEEN POST

Fig. 1. The 'achievement' scores under the 5 experimental conditions.

Table 2. Means and standard deviations of form scores for the five conditions during the pre-test,
between-test and post-test.
TT1,, /V = 8 VMT, N = 8 VFT, JV = 8 VMFT, W = 8 TT2, iV = 8
Condition X S.D. X S.D. X S.D. X S.D. X S.D.
Pre-test 40.2 3.4 43.1 6.7 44.0 3.6 41.9 7.0 46.7 6.1
Between-test 47.6 3.9 48.3 6.4 51.9 6.4 50.8 7.4 50.3 6.0
Post-test 48.5 3.1 51.3 4.7 55.4 5.6 51.9 6.3 51.5 7.5

Correlation between achievement and form scores

For each of the three tests, Pearson product-moment correlations between form and
achievement scores (as defined in the methods section) over the total sample of 40 subjects were
computed (See Table 3). Only for the post-test (that is to say, after five training sessions had
been completed) was this correlation coefficient significant (r=0.29; n = 40; P<0.05).
 The tennis serve and video-modelling 135

60.

55

gSB
u
CD

0£
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

P45
• * TTl
B- BVMT
* * VFT
o o VMFT

PRE BETWEEN POST

Fig. 2. The 'form' scores under the 5 experimental conditions.

Table 3. Pearson correlation coefficients

between achievement and form scores
during the pre-test, between-test and
post-tests.

Pre-test 0.01 0.467

Between-test -0.02 0.457
Post-test 0.29 0.034*
*P<0.05

Discussion

Generally speaking, the results of the present research indicate that video instruction methods
(VMT, VFT, VMFT) with novice tennis players do not lead to either better achievement or
form scores than traditional training methods (TTl, TT2). Substituting 15 min of practical
training - in a lesson duration of 45 min - with video instruction on each of five training
sessions, produced no statistically significant advantages above those of a traditional training
procedure (TTl) on which all the available time was devoted to practical training. Furthermore,
 136 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

the video instruction conditions were not significantly better than a traditional training
procedure having the same amount of practical training time, 30 min per session (TT2).
Thus, no clear support was provided for Rikli and Smith's (1980) expectation that the VMT,
VFT and VMFT conditions would be superior to practical training alone (TT1 and TT2). It is
important in this respect to note that all training methods, whether or not video instruction was
provided, had significant training effects. A possible interpretation of the non-advantageous
effect of presenting a video model is that under all experimental conditions the trainer himself
served as a dynamic model. It may be that this, alone, is sufficient for the purpose and that any
additional information is redundant. It must also be recalled that all groups watched a video
model serve 16 services prior to the pre-test.
The hypotheses that the VMT condition would lead to superior performance in comparison
to the VFT and VMFT conditions and that the VFT condition would produce better results
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

than the VMFT condition, were not confirmed. This failure to confirm the results of Ross et al.
(1985) might be explained by the fact that their subjects were only confronted with a relatively
simple laboratory task. Subjects, in their experiment, reached a near maximal level of
performance after a very limited period of training. It is questionable if the learning process for
such a simple task is comparable to that of learning a more complex task, such as the tennis
service.
Although the presentation of video-feedback did not lead to significant differences between
groups, this should not be taken as strong evidence that such feedback is of no use. An additional
ANOVA with, as conditions, 'video-feedback' (a combination of the VFT and VMFT groups)
and 'no video-feedback' (a combination of theTTl, TT2 and VMT groups) showed, for the form
scores only, an almost significant interaction effect for 'test x conditions' [F (2.76) = 2.96;
P=0.058] in favour of video-feedback. It is, however, appreciated that this specific finding not
having been predicted, a post-hoc test is only legitimate in the case of a significant overall
conditions effect in the ANOVA. On the other hand, it cautions against an unconditional claim
that the present study necessarily provides convincing evidence that video-feedback is of little
use to novice tennis players. It is possible that a more pronounced effect would be found if the
advice of Cooper and Rothstein (1981) were followed. They are of the opinion that video-
feedback, both about the way in which the movement is carried out and its result (the trajectory
of the ball after being hit), should be given. This advice was not followed in the present study
because of practical problems: it was not possible within the tennis hall used to obtain a suitable
camera position. Consequently, the feedback display only provided knowledge of performance
(movement information) and no knowledge of results (information about the outcome of the
service), although the subjects, of course, could notice if the ball was hit well or not.
Subsequent research will be directed to the question whether more clearly advantageous
effects can be expected in using video-feedback with more advanced players; this contention has
been put forward (without strong experimental support) by Rothstein and Arnold (1976). In
addition, the spacing between practices will be shortened; the relatively long periods of one
week between the training sessions in the present study may have interfered with the retention of
the relevant cues available in the demonstrations by the model and in the video-feedback
(Burwitz, 1981).
The emergence of a significant correlation between form and achievement scores following
five training sessions, is an indication that attention to the method of performing a skill can lead
 The tennis serve and video-modelling 137

not only to better form scores per se but also better achievement scores. It is also noteworthy
that the absence of a significant relationship between achievement and form scores in the early
learning stages cautions against evaluating learning effects on the basis of either score
separately. While the correlation was significant after five training sessions, it was still rather low
(r=0.29). An interesting question is the extent to which it might increase if the training were
extended beyond the five sessions used in this experiment. This will be the focus of attention in a
subsequent research project.
In conclusion, it is interesting to comment upon the scale used for assessing the form scores. It
was possible by the use of the SOL scale to quickly assign a reliable tennis service form score.
Observers who had undergone a training period of 3 h were able, within a 10 min period, to
reliably appraise, from video, tennis services. With the SOL scale a detailed picture of the way in
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

which the different stages of the tennis serve develop can be built up. Thus, it can serve not only
as a measuring instrument but also as a basis for giving technical advice. At the same time, it is
worth noting that in spite of its present high level of reliability and validity, the scale could be
additionally improved by making some of the items more precise and, perhaps, by removing one
or two items.
In summary it can be said that no clear advantages of using video mediated instruction
methods in teaching beginners the tennis serve could be demonstrated. In addition, five
practical sessions of 30 min duration were shown to be as effective as five practical sessions of
45 min in producing improvements in both form and achievement scores of beginner tennis
players. While, in the early stages of training, form and achievement scores were not shown to be
significantly related, after the five sessions a significant correlation (F<0.05) was shown.

References

Brinker, B.P.L.M. den. (1971) Visuele feedback bij schaatsenrijders. In Sport, Lichamelijke Vorming en
Psychologie (edited by P.S. Blitz, H. Nakken en D. Swaan) Haarlem: De Vrieseborch.
Brown, H.S. and Messerschmith, L. (1948) An experiment in teaching with and without motion picture.
Research Quarterly 19, 304-307.
Burwitz, L. (1981) The use of demonstrations and video-tape recorders in sport and physical education. In
Vision and Sport (edited by I.M. Cockerill and W.W. MacGillivary) Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.
Cooper, L.K. and Rothstein, A.L. (1981) Videotape replay and the learning of skills in open and closed
environments. Research Quarterly 52, 191-199.
Del Rey, P. (1971) The effects of videotaped feedback on form, accuracy and latency in an open and closed
environment. Journal of Motor Behavior 3, 281-287.
Emmen, H.H. and Wesseling, L.G. (1984) Het effect van video-instructie-methodes op het aanleren van de
tennisservice aan beginnende tennis-spelers. Doctoraal scriptie IFLO, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
Feltz, D.L. (1982) The effects of age and number of demonstrations on modelling of form and performance.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 53, 291-296.
Feltz, D.L. and Landers, D.M. (1977) Informational-motivational components of a model demonstration.
Research Quarterly 48, 525-533.
Gray, C.A. and Brumbach, W.B. (1967) Effect of daylight projection of film loops on learning badminton.
Research Quarterly 38, 562-569.
 138 Emmen, Wesseling, Bootsma, Whiting and Van Wieringen

Hegmann, E.W. (1974) The effect of videotape viewing training on learning tennis skills when utilizing
videotape replay for feedback. Dissertations Abstracts International 34A, 4835-4836.
Hewitt, J.E. (1966) Hewitt's tennis achievement test. Research Quarterly 37, 231-240.
Holding, D.H. (1965) Principles of Training. Oxford: Pergamon.
Keele, S.W. (1977) Current status of motor program concept. In Psychology of Motor Behavior and Sport.
(edited by R. Christina and D. Landers) Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Landers, D.M. (1975) Observational learning of a motor skill: temporal spacing of demonstrations and
audience presence. Journal of Motor Behavior 7, 281-287.
Landers, D.M. and Landers, D.M. (1973) Teacher versus peer model: effects of model's presence and
performance level on motor behavior. Journal of Motor Behavior 5, 129-140.
Lockhart, A. (1944) The value of the motion picture as an instructional device in learning a motor skill.
Research Quarterly 15, 181-187.
Downloaded by [University of Auckland Library] at 20:55 16 February 2015

Londeree, B.R. (1967) Effect of training with motion pictures versus flash cards upon football play
recognition. Research Quarterly 38, 202-207.
Martens, R., Burwitz, L. and Zuckerman, J. (1976) Modeling effects on motor performance. Research
Quarterly 47, 227-291.
Murnin, J. A., Hayes, W. and Harby, S. F. (1970) Quoted in Bell, V.L. Sensorimotor Learning. Pacific
Pallisades, California: Goodyear Publishing Company.
Nelson, D.O. (1958) Effect of slow-motion loop films on the learning of golf. Research Quarterly 29, 27-45.
Rikli, R. and Smith, G. (1980) Videotape feedback effects on tennis serving form. Perceptual and Motor
Skills 50, 895-901.
Robb, M. (1972) Dynamics of Motor Skill Acquisition. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Ross, D., Bird, A.M., Doody, S.G. and Zoeller, M. (1985) Effects of model and videotape feedback with
knowledge of results on motor performance. Human Movement Science 4, 149-157.
Rothstein, A.L. and Arnold, R.K. (1976) Bridging the gap: application of research on videotape feedback
and bowling. Motor Skills: Theory into Practice 1, 35-62.
Sims, H.P. and Manz, C.C. (1982) Modeling influences on employee behavior. Personnel Journal 61,
58-65.
Ungerer, D. (1973) Leistungs- und Belastungsfähigkeit im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Schorndorf: Verlag
Karl Hofmann.
Volpert, W. (1973) Sensumotorisches Lernen. Frankfurt a. M.: Limpert Verlag.