JDE
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Dent Educ. 52(4): 198-201 1988
© 1988 American Dental Education Association
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feil, P.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, T
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feil, P.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, T
Journal of Dental Education, Vol 52, Issue 4, 198-201
Copyright © 1988 by American Dental Education Association

Articles

The effect of knowledge of the desired outcome on dental motor performance

PH Feil and T Reed

Knowledge of the desired outcome of a series of movements is a critical component of motor performance, since it is used to develop the appropriate motor program and to form a basis for understanding terminal extrinsic feedback and formulating subjective reinforcement. In dentistry, information about the desired outcome is almost always disseminated in a lecture and laboratory manual, and a demonstration often is provided. However, mastery by students usually is not given the importance it deserves. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an instructional strategy designed to increase the students' knowledge of the desired outcome by determining whether such knowledge had an effect on dental motor performance. Two intact groups of first-year dental students were randomly assigned to a control or experimental treatment. The control treatment included conventional written and oral descriptions of criteria and methods for completing the occlusal (n = 93) and mesio-occlusal (n = 99) amalgam preparations. The experimental treatment directed the students' attention to critical features of tooth anatomy, and the preparation and methods for assessing performance. Results indicated statistically significant differences (p less than .05) in favor of the experimental group for both performance and degree of agreement with the instructor's evaluation of the mesio-occlusal amalgam only.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
F. W. Licari, G. W. Knight, and P. J. Guenzel
Designing Evaluation Forms to Facilitate Student Learning
J Dent Educ., January 1, 2008; 72(1): 48 - 58.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
D. Henzi, E. Davis, R. Jasinevicius, and W. Hendricson
North american dental students' perspectives about their clinical education.
J Dent Educ., April 1, 2006; 70(4): 361 - 377.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
R. Haj-Ali and P. Feil
Rater reliability: short- and long-term effects of calibration training.
J Dent Educ., April 1, 2006; 70(4): 428 - 433.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
K. G. Boberick
Creating a Web-Enhanced Interactive Preclinic Technique Manual: Case Report and Student Response
J Dent Educ., December 1, 2004; 68(12): 1245 - 1257.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by the American Dental Education Association.