vfogel jbhm golf study

Journal of Behavioral Health and Medicine 2010, 1, 25-41 Number 1 (Spring 2010)

EVALUATING THE EFFICACY OF TAGTEACH AS A TRAINING STRATEGY FOR TEACHING A GOLF SWING

Victoria A. Fogel, Timothy M. Weil, and Heather Burris

University of South Florida

TAGteach (Teaching with Acoustical Guidance) is a training methodology for implementing operant principles. Although the TAGteach methodology was de-rived from clicker training, TAGteach provides additional procedures along with the audible stimulus to promote skill acquisition. This methodology is being taught to the mainstream population to increase skill performance across many domains (e.g. gymnastics, golf, dance, rock-climbing, parent training, academ-ics, communication, vocational training, etc.); however, it has yet to be scientifically evaluated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate TAGteach by utilizing its methodology as an intervention for teaching a golf swing to a novice golfer. The participant was a woman in her early thirties. Seven training ses-sions were conducted utilizing TAGteach to train the components of a golf swing. Results of a multiple baseline design showed that the TAGteach treat-ment package resulted in skill acquisition in 4 out of 5 skill sets and effects were observed to generalize to another golf club.

Keywords: Audible stimulus, Generalized conditioned reinforcer, Skills train-ing, Coaching

_____________________ The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2007) reported that the more than 50% of U.S. adults do not engage in enough physical activity to produce health benefits and 25 % of U.S. adults do not engage in physical activity at all. Improving or estab-lishing a repertoire in a sport is one potential strategy that may lead to an increase in physi-cal activity among adults and children. The ability to accurately perform a repertoire in any given sport may serve as reinforcement and/or as an establishing operation for contin-ual engagement in that sport thus producing ___________ Address Correspondence to: Victoria A. Fogel University of South Florida Department of Child and Family Studies 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd./MHC 2113A Tampa, Florida, 33612 Email: [email protected] Requests for reprints should be sent to: Timothy M. Weil University of South Florida Department of Child and Family Studies 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd./MHC 2113A Tampa, Florida, 33612 Email: [email protected]

an increase in physical activity. Increasing performance in any sport can be difficult if the coach does not possess the skills needed to breakdown the repertoire, assess the individual’s deficits, and utilize effective teaching strategies to evoke desired responses (e.g. shaping, chaining, positive reinforcement, specific feedback (verbal, vis-ual, audio), goal setting, public posting, and self monitoring). Traditional coaching proce-dures often rely on providing the individual with verbal instructions and modeling to teach or improve sport performance; however, the feedback usually focuses on what behaviors were performed incorrectly and instructions to correct multiple behaviors at one given time (Allison & Ayllon, 1980; Anderson & Kilpatrick, 2002). Although behavioral tech-niques might be utilized by coaches (e.g. goal setting, video feedback, public posting, and feedback), without behavioral oversight, these ___________ The authors would like to thank Raymond Miltenber-ger for helpful comments and feedback during the preparation of this manuscript.

25

26 VICTORIA A. FOGEL ET AL.

procedures might be implemented incorrectly and consequentially seen as ineffective to the mainstream population. Many studies have proven the effectiveness of implementing behavioral techniques to improve sport performance and some have also utilized coaches as the change agents (e.g. Anderson & Kirkpatrick, 2002; Klado-poulas & McConas, 2001; McKenzie & Rushall, 1974; Scott, Scott, & Goldwater, 1997; Smith & Ward, 2006; Ziegler, 1994); however, these studies do not provide sugges-tions on how to disseminate these techniques in a manner that is accessible to the main-stream coaching population. TAGteach (Teaching with Acoustical Guid-ance) is a training package, designed for the mainstream population, which utilizes several behavioral principles and procedures. Some of these include: chaining, task clarification, positive reinforcement, and shaping to pro-mote skill acquisition (see Method). This training package evolved from clicker train-ing, a method of animal training that employs an audible sound to mark behavior as it oc-curs. In the human arena, TAGteach has been applied to areas such as dance, soccer, gym-nastics, self-help, academics, classroom management, and staff training (McKeon, personal communication, April 2008). The main component of the TAGteach training is the tagger which is an audible stimulus used to mark desirable behavior as it occurs. The purpose of the tagger is to pro-vide immediate feedback and reinforcement in close temporal proximity to the occurrence of behavior (TAGteach International, 2004). This audible stimulus is said to serve as a bridging stimulus between the emission of the behavior and the delivery of the primary rein-forcer (Pryor, 1999). In behavior analytic terms, this audible stimulus may function as a generalized conditioned reinforcer because it is paired with either another generalized con-ditioned reinforcer and/or unconditioned reinforcer. For example, in clicker training,

the audible stimulus is usually followed by a primary reinforcer (e.g. food); whereas in TAGteach, the audible stimulus might be fol-lowed by a primary reinforcer (e.g. food), a conditioned reinforcer (e.g. token), and/or a generalized conditioned reinforcer (e.g. feed-back) (Skinner, 1951). The selection of the stimulus that follows the tagger depends on the individual’s history of reinforcement. McCall and Burgin (2002) suggest that an audible stimulus may enhance learning as their results showed that horses, when trained with the use of an acoustical marker, exhib-ited a higher frequency of responses than horses not trained with an acoustical marker. However, in comparison to the widespread adoption of clicker training in animal training programs, there are few animal studies that have evaluated the effectiveness of such a device on skill acquisition (Ferguson & Rosales-Ruiz, 2001; Langbein, Siebert, Nuer-berg, & Maleuffel, 2007; McCall & Burgin, 2002). In addition, it is important to note that only one article with human subjects could be found in which an audible stimulus was util-ized as a method of providing feedback to improve performance. Scott and Scott (1997) utilized a photoelectric beam that provided an audible stimulus (beep) as a method of feed-back for a pole-vaulter. When the pole-vaulter broke through the photoelectric beam, a beep sounded indicating that the desired height was achieved. Although this study em-ployed an audible stimulus, the stimulus was used to provide feedback on the outcome of a set of skills (i.e. desired height achieved) not on specific behavior. Currently, there is no research reported that has attempted to test the efficacy of utilizing an audible stimulus as a generalized conditioned reinforcer with hu-man subjects on skill acquisition. Although the tagger is the main component of TAGteach, it is the methodology of using the tagger which defines the difference be-tween using a tagger alone and using the methodology called TAGteach. The differ-

TEACHING A GOLF SWING 27

ences between clicker training and the TAG-teach method, employed in this study, are the use of the following procedures: TAG phra-seology, personalized tagpoint, debrief, and the focus point (see Method). These proce-dures currently lack empirical evaluation. In addition to the procedures listed above, the TAGteach treatment package also includes behavioral interventions that have been proven effective in increasing sport perform-ance such as positive reinforcement, shaping, instructions, feedback, modeling, and re-hearsal (Allison & Ayllon, 1980, Andreson & Kilpatrick, 2002, Kladopoulos & McComas, 2001; Scott & Scott, 1997). The TAGteach treatment package is being utilized by many individuals, across fields and has yet to be scientifically evaluated. There-fore, the purpose of this study was to take the first step towards evaluating TAGteach by utilizing this methodology to teach a complex skill, a golf swing, to a novice golfer.

METHOD

Participant, Setting, & Apparatus One novice golfer, Bailey, was chosen to participate in this study. Bailey was a female in her early thirties. An interview was con-ducted to determine if Bailey had any physical limitations as well as to obtain in-formation on her past history with golf. Prior to this study, she had no golf experience; Bai-ley had never hit a golf ball. She reported no physical limitations. Following the interview, direct observation utilizing a camera with a video function, was performed to assess her golf swing. The following materials were used in this study: five task analyses of skills sets that comprise a golf swing; a golf instruction video by David Leadbetter (2005) which was utilized to develop the five task analyses; a tagger; practice logs; a ball path scoring sheet; a chair; a paper plate; a 5 iron (training club); a driver (generalization club); and a camera with a video function.

All sessions were conducted at a public driving range one time per week either on a Saturday or Sunday and lasted from 1 hr 30 min to 2 hrs and 30 min. Duration of sessions depended on the number of steps in each skill set. A total of eight sessions were conducted. Baseline measures were collected during the first session, at the beginning of each session, and ceased for each skill set once intervention was implemented. Each training session was dedicated to 1 of the five task analyses. The seventh session was conducted to assess maintenance (follow-up) and to re-teach a component (key positions) in the last skill set. Response Measurement and Interobserver Agreement The dependent variables were the percent-age of steps performed of each of the five skill sets which comprise a golf swing (grip, address, alignment, pivot (lower body), and arm positions). These skill sets were identi-fied and defined through viewing a golf instruction video by David Leadbetter (2005). Each skill set was task analyzed so that the component behaviors (called tagpoints) could be easily identified and marked (tagged). Exemplars of tagpoints for two skill set are listed in the Appendix A for illustrative pur-poses. Training involved the use of a 5 iron golf club for all skill sets. Generalization data were collected on a driver to evaluate transfer of the skill to a longer club with a different angle of clubhead. Prior to and immediately following each session, five pictures were taken of Bailey’s grip as well as video footage for 5 golf swings across both clubs. The pictures and video footage from each session were scored inde-pendently by the first and third author utilizing the task analyzed checklists for each skill set. Percentages of each skill set per-formed during an attempt were calculated by taking the number of steps performed inde-pendently divided by the number of possible steps. Due to technical error with the video-


taping on session 3 (alignment) and session 5 (arm positions), no data from session 3 on alignment were collected and only 3 attempts for session 5 on arm positions were collected. In addition to filming and scoring the skill sets, the ball path and distance of the last 5 balls hit at the end of each session were measured (this was not an exact measurement, but an estimation of the product of the golf swing). At the end of sessions 2-7, the re-searcher instructed Bailey to hit 5 golf balls. Ball path and distance were recorded by util-izing a diagram of the driving range and field markers (see Figure 1). These measures were added during session two (alignment) and therefore no baseline or reliability data were collected. Interobserver agreement was conducted by an independent observer across all phases and skill sets for 33% of the total data. Two ob-servers independently viewed video from each session scoring all 5 skill sets for each swing recorded during the session. Task ana-lyzed checklists were used to score each skill set and each component was scored either as occurring or not occurring. Agreement was then calculated by taking the number of agreements divided by the number of agree-ments plus disagreements and then multiplying by 100. Agreements averaged 93% across all observations, with a range of 80% to 100%. Experimental Sequence and Design A multiple baseline design across skill sets with a follow-up component was used to evaluate TAGteach. All sessions were con-ducted by the first author. In addition to participating in training sessions, Bailey was asked to practice the previously learned skill sets at least three times during the week and to record her practice on logs provided to her weekly (practice logs). Practice logs, which consisted of practicing and recording the practice of newly acquired skills outside of the training session, were employed as a strat-

egy to promote response maintenance of previously acquired skill sets (Ericsson, 2003; Krampe & Ericsson, 1996). Baseline. During the baseline condition for each skill set, Bailey was asked to take swings with both clubs prior to and following each session. Baseline data were collected on each of the 5 skill sets at the beginning of each session until each skill set was taught, with both the 5 iron and driver, via picture and video footage. No feedback regarding her performance was provided. Baseline data were not collected on ball path and distance as this analysis was added during the second session. TAGteach. During the intervention condi-tion, Bailey systematically received training on each skill set utilizing the TAGteach methodology. The TAGteach methodology used in this study consisted of the following components which have been previously de-fined by TAGteach International, 2004.

TAG phraseology- providing a specific verbal discriminative stimulus, to avoid any prior learning history that may inter-fere with skill acquisition such as utilizing instructions that have been used in the past, prior to an incorrect response, and then followed by a potential punisher (e.g. “That’s not it.”) .In addition, the phraseol-ogy is contained to one sentence and is stated in terms of what is desired (e.g. “The tagpoint is_”), not what should be avoided; identifying events that meet cri-teria, rather than identifying errors or failures; instruction for one aspect of the targeted behavior is given at a time, rather than several; and breaking behavior down into single units that can be easily identi-fied when achieved (must be binary, yes or no). This specific terminology is anec-dotally reported to have a positive effect on the acquisition rate of the desired be-havior, but has yet to be scientifically evaluated (McKeon, personal communica-tion, April 2008).


Tagger- a hand-held device emitting a brief, distinct, uniform stimulus used to mark behavior as it occurs (generalized conditioned reinforcer). Tagpoint- a single selected behavior that is acoustically marked with a tag as it is occurring. TAGteach only tags one spe-cific behavior at a time. Once the tagpoint is occurring consistently, the coach may move on to the next target behavior or successive approximation of the desired behavior (shaping). Tag- the sound produced by the tagger which follows the occurrence of a tag-point. The student is taught that a tag is defined as “‘yes, that is correct,” and the absence of a tag is defined as “try again.” It is important to note that no vocal feed-back is provided when the targeted behavior does or does not occur. BID (Break it Down) - dividing a behav-ior into segments that are easily achieved and reinforced. This is the process of de-fining and choosing the tagpoint (task analysis). Three-try rule- a teaching procedure in which a learner is quickly redirected in the event they have not successfully produced a tagpoint within three tries. At this junc-ture, the teacher utilizes the BID method to outline a new tagpoint within the learner’s repertoire from which a new shaping plan can be developed. Value-Added tagpoint- a single tagpoint that will produce more than one desired behavior within the same behavioral chain (behavioral cusp). Debrief- a verbal interaction between the teacher and the learner in which the tag session is analyzed to determine the next tagpoint(s). For example, after a specific behavior has been tagged consistently, the teacher might ask the learner if he/she is ready to move on to the next tagpoint and/or what tagpoint the learner would like to work on next.

Focus point- an instruction provided in terms of what is desired, but in which no tag will be provided (i.e. “The focus point is _”). Personalized tagpoint- Once a behavior is defined to the student, the student engages in the behavior and provides their own tact (label) for that behavior. The TAG theory is that when the personalized tact is used in the tagpoint, this will provide a higher likelihood that the desired behavior will occur in the future. Point of success- a behavior that occurs in the student’s repertoire, to start with or re-turn to, in which the student is guaranteed a tag. For example, if the student does not exhibit the behavior within three trials, the coach is to break this behavior down into components to increase the probability of completing the skill and to start with a be-havior that is already occurring consistently in the student’s repertoire. Forward chaining- The system of building a series of tagpoints from the start point to the end point. Teaching starts with the first behavior (tagpoint) in a chain of be-haviors. Once the first tagpoint (behavior) is acquired, training begins on the second tagpoint. This process repeats itself until all tagpoints are acquired.

Training. The first author received certifi-cation and training in the methodology of TAGteaching by attending, presenting, and teaching at several TAGteach workshops over the past three years. In addition, a checklist outlining the format of the session was util-ized and filled out every session to ensure that each session was conducted in the same for-mat (see Appendix C). No treatment integrity was conducted by an independent observer. Session Format. Each session was con-ducted in the following format: Review practice log from the previous week (with the exception of the first session as there was nothing to review); take five pictures of grip; record video footage on five golf swings with


both clubs, review over last session’s tag-points to ensure skills maintained (e.g. the instructor would ask Bailey to demonstrate each tagpoint once, no training was conducted at this time); conduct TAG session over new skill set (utilizing the TAGteach components discussed above); collect video footage of five swings with both clubs; collect data on ball path and distance for the last 5 balls hit; and review new practice log (Figure 3). Intervention was implemented in sessions 2-6 with each session focusing on a different skill set (i.e., session 2 trained grip, session 3 trained alignment, etc.). In session 2, the trainer would physically prompt Bailey on the proper hand and finger positions for a proper grip; tag each component as it occurred; and, given errors, back up to a previously demon-strated behavior and provide a prompt for the subsequent behavior in the chain. More spe-cifically, when a component response was performed correctly, it was ‘tagged’ with the tagger. Once the component response oc-curred six times independently, the researcher would ask Bailey if she was ready to place the step in the skill (Debrief). If Bailey agreed, the response was placed back into the chain (skill set) and tagged. If she was not ready, additional repetitions were marked. When the component response occurred six times in the chain, the protocol above was followed, and the next component response was taught until all component responses were independently occurring within the chain. The session was completed after reviewing the practice log for the week (see Appendix B). The practice log consisted of a list of the steps for the grip and Bailey was asked to practice each step three times before the next session and to record each practice. Sessions 3-6 involved training on each of the remaining skill sets and was conducted in similar fashion to session 2. In each session, the researcher described and demonstrated the new skill set for Bailey and then used the tag-ger to mark each correct demonstration of the

skills in the set. However, these sessions also started with a review over the previous ses-sion’s tagpoints (instructor asked the participant to demonstrate each tagpoint once to ensure maintenance of previously acquired skill sets) and the practice logs not only in-cluded the skill set taught during that session, but all previously taught skill sets (see Ap-pendix B). Session 7 was conducted as a follow-up to assess maintenance of all trained skill sets. During this session it was observed that the arm position skill set was not performed cor-rectly and a decision was made to re-train the arm position skill set by further breaking down the skill set into more precise approxi-mations. Generalization. The intervention employed the 5 iron during all training sessions. A sec-ond club, the driver, was utilized in this study to assess generalization effects across clubs. No training occurred with the driver, data were recorded on five swings before and after each session to assess generalization effects. Social Validity. A social validity form em-bedded in the practice log was provided at the end of each session and at the end of the study to assess the acceptability of the use of this training. The social validity form (Likert scale 1-6) was comprised of five statements regard-ing the participant’s view of the intervention (Appendix B). Questions pertained to the acceptability of the TAGteach protocol and perceived outcomes of her participation in the training. In addition to the likert scale, an opened-ended question survey was provided at the end of the last training session (Appen-dix D).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The use of the TAGteach treatment package resulted in skill acquisition on four of the five skill sets with the target golf club and general-ized to the driver without training. In addition, maintenance was observed for the


-1

B L T AG Maintenanc e

G r ip

10 0%

0%

0%

1 0%

2 0%

3 0%

4 0%

5 0%

6 0%

7 0%

8 0%

9 0%

-1

10

P ivo t0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0%

-1

10

0%

0%

1 0%

2 0%

3 0%

4 0%

5 0%

6 0%

7 0%

8 0%

9 0%

0%

A d d re ssP o s it ion

-1

10

0 %

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

8 0 %

9 0 %

0 %N o

Vid e o R e l i

Alig n m en t

-1

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 21 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 26 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 31 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 36 3 7 3 8 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 48

A tte m s

A rm P o s ition s

R e tau g h tO n e C om p o n e n t

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0%

5

p t

Perc

ent o

f Tas

k An

alys

es C

ompl

eted

Cor

rect

ly fo

r Eac

h Sk

ill Se

t

Figure 1. Percentage of skill set (task analysis) performed on the 5 iron immediately following and prior to new training sessions. Each data po t represents one attempt. in


BL TAG Maintenance

G r ip

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Figure 2. Percentage of skill set (task analysis) performed on the driver immediately following and prior to new training sessions on the 5 iron. These data support the notion that the skill set trained with the 5 iron generalized to the driver. Each data point represents one attempt.

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 3 4 35 36 37 3 8 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

em pts

R etau g h tOne C om p one n t

Att

Ar mPosition

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Addre ssPositio n

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Alignm en t

N o Vid eoR e li

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Piv o t

Perc

ent o

f Tas

k A

naly

ses

Com

plet

ed C

orre

ctly

for E

ach

Skill

Set


target club (see Figures 1 and 2 for both clubs). No effect was observed on the arm positions skill set. Session 7 was conducted to assess follow-up and to re-train one component of the arm positions skill set (identified as a value added tagpoint in that other behaviors within the chain were likely to occur if this behavior occurred). Although the results of this additional training session yielded an increasing trend, no substantial increase in the arm positions skill set was observed with the follow-up session. Unfortunately, we were unable to continue sessions with Bailey.

Shape Code Session 2: Session 6: Session 7:

200

150

100

25

50

Figure 3. Ball path and distance data from the last 5 swings in sessions 2-7

Ball path varied widely and was seen to be inconsistent in session 2 (the first training session). Nonetheless, ball path became more consistently straight across the five training sessions such that all shots landed in the cen-ter during session 6. However, ball path became more erratic in session 7 when a component in the arm positions skill set was re-taught (Figure 1). This is not surprising as correcting inappropriate physical movements by training on proper movements, especially with foundational skill sets such as the arm position, will cause performance to initially


deteriorate (unlearning the inappropriate movements) before improvement is seen through consistent use of the proper move-ments. No significant change in ball distance occurred during the study (Figure 3). The purpose of the study was to teach a straight forward golf swing; ball path and distance were added in session two to assess the con-comitant effects of skill acquisition on these two variables. Although no significant im-provement was observed in ball distance, there was an improvement in the mechanics of the golf swing which resulted in straighter, more consistent ball path [insert Figures 1here]. To clearly show the differences in ball path and distance observed throughout the study, data for sessions 3, 4, 5 were left out of Figure 3. TAGteach was reported to have been a so-cially acceptable teaching method to Bailey. She reported an average of 5.4 out of 6 on the social validity surveys administered at the end of each session. In addition, her written feed-back to the open-ended questions on the last practice was favorable of the teaching strat-egy. For an example, Bailey wrote, “I was given a clear description of what to do, and when I did it…CLICK! I knew right away that it was correct and could easily return to that position. Now, when I pick up a club, my hands go naturally through all the tagpoints within seconds. I used to think of them each time, individually, seeing the image of my hand in the position, hearing the name of the tagpoint in my mind, putting the two together and moving into position. Now, my hands fly into position on their own immediately- I don’t even think about it.” A limitation to this study is the failure to produce skill acquisition with the arm posi-tions skill set. TAGteach had little effect on this skill set and we hypothesized this was not acquired because of two factors: 1) the arm positions are the arm movements to the upper portion of the swing. The lower portion was taught separately the week prior (pivot). Since

movements of the upper and lower body need to occur in synchronization, it is quite possi-ble that learning these skills separately resulted in uncoordinated movements of the newly acquired upper portion skills when put together. For example, if Bailey engaged in the newly acquired upper portion components at the incorrect times, these responses may have been incompatible with the previously learned lower portion responses, therefore resulting in no acquisition of the upper por-tion when placed back into the natural swing. In addition, this lack of synchronization may also account for the erratic ball placement observed following session 7. Future research, should investigate the effects of providing tagpoints that target synchronized movement of the upper and lower body. 2) The arm posi-tions were only comprised of seven components, but each of these components required more intensive training (more repeti-tions, longer session, and greater response effort) to obtain consistency in each compo-nent, than did the other skill sets. It is hypothesized that maintenance did not occur due to the intensive session (fatigue). In addi-tion, future research should evaluate the effects of dividing the arm positions skill set into two sessions: back swing and follow through. Furthermore, the type of clubs util-ized in this study (5 iron and driver) may have affected performance. The results from this study indicated similar effects across the two different clubs used; however, it is possible that different results may have been obtained if another club was used. Future research should evaluate the types of clubs utilized to determine if results would vary across clubs. Another limitation to this study is the ab-sence of treatment integrity. Data on treatment integrity were not collected due to the potential reactivity that might have oc-curred with the presence of another observer and/or camera. However, the addition of treatment integrity would have ensured that the researcher conducted the methodology


consistently across conditions and would have validated the session checklists, thereby, also providing data on the frequency of repetitions for each step. It is recommended that future research includes these measures. Technical difficulties with equipment oc-curred during sessions 3 and 5 and did not allow for a true assessment of the effects of TAGteach on skill acquisition for the align-ment skill set. Maintenance data would suggest that skill acquisition occurred as a result of the TAGteach training; however, without the data this cannot be validated. Also, data collection on ball path and distance was added to the study after session one and therefore, there was no baseline data to com-pare. Furthermore, to record an estimation of the direction and placement of the ball after each training session, distance markers on the field and a paper diagram were utilized. It would have been desirable to have accurate measurement techniques such as a range finder to evaluate both precise distance as well as measurable variation for off-center shots (actually measure angle of flight path or simply the distance from the centerline to where the ball comes to rest). The primary dependent variables for this study were the five skill sets that comprise a straight forward golf swing. All sessions were conducted at a public driving range and because the partici-pant had no prior experience with golf, there was no assessment of the effect of this train-ing on the participant’s score in a game of golf. However, it is important to assess the product of these skill sets to ensure that train-ing results in desirable outcomes in the natural environment (e.g. a game of golf); therefore, forthcoming studies should include assessments of ball path, distance, and score using accurate measurement instruments in both the training and natural environment. To avoid other factors affecting performance (e.g. social disapproval), it is recommended that the majority of training is conducted at a driving range and generalization probes are

collected on a golf course unless interference from others can be avoided (e.g. off times, unpopular course, etc.). The use of practice logs could be seen as a potential confound as it was an additional procedure added to the TAGteach methodol-ogy. It could be suggested that results were affected in some way by the practice logs; however, data were collected immediately following the TAGteach sessions to assess the effects of TAGteach on skill acquisition. Therefore, practice logs would not have af-fected these data. The reason for the practice logs was to promote maintenance of the skills that were already acquired in the previous TAGteach training sessions. The five skills sets complete one behavioral chain and if Bai-ley did not maintained a previously learned skill set, it could have made it impossible for her to demonstrate steps in future skill sets as the discriminative stimulus needed for a fu-ture step might be absent if the skill sets were not maintained. Thus, in order to properly assess the effects of TAGteach on each skill set, it seemed necessary to add a component that would increase the likelihood of mainte-nance of previously acquired skills. Future studies should evaluate the compo-nents of TAGteach that have no empirical support for improving performance. Specifi-cally, the question regarding the effectiveness of the audible stimulus (tagger) alone on skill acquisition is of extreme interest. Descriptive verbal praise has been shown to be an effec-tive way to mark behavior as it occurs. However, TAGteach would contend that the delivery of verbal praise is not as immediate as an audible stimulus and can be inconsistent in tone and intonation. Skinner (1951) dis-cusses that to optimize the effects of reinforcement, the reinforcing stimulus should be provided as soon as the behavior occurs and delaying reinforcement, even by seconds, could diminish the effects of reinforcement. Therefore, it could be argued that descriptive verbal praise, if functioning as a generalized


conditioned reinforcer, may result in acciden-tally reinforcing undesirable responses and/or punishing desirable responses and ultimately, slowing down the rate of skill acquisition. Given that the tagger produces a consistent sound, is provided almost immediately, and is paired in such a way as to function as a gen-eralized conditioned reinforcer, it would be important to determine if a tagger produces greater acquisition rates than verbal praise alone. In addition to evaluating individual components of the TAGteach methodology, it would be beneficial to assess which compo-nents or combinations of components were response for the skill acquisition demon-strated in this study. A noteworthy observation is that, during sessions, Bailey reported that the sound of the camera (camera made a click noise when starting and stopping) made her, “nervous.” She stated that she thought she performed better when she was not being recorded. No data were collected to validate this concern. However, it is quite possible that the sound of the camera became a conditioned stimulus that elicited autonomic arousal as a condi-tioned response (i.e. anxiety). This may have created an establishing operation for covert verbal behavior which may have interfered with her golf chain. It would be advantageous for future research to investigate the potential unintentional effects of equipment utilized in a study on skill acquisition as well as the ef-fects of verbal regulation on performance. TAGteach is a methodology that utilizes many behavioral procedures. This study demonstrated that TAGteach implemented by an individual that is trained in behavioral pro-cedures and in the TAG methodology resulted in skill acquisition across all but one skill set. One participant was used in this study, a rep-lication across many participants is necessary to determine if results would generalized across individuals. In addition, given that the purpose of TAGteach is to provide an effec-tive teaching methodology for the mainstream

population, it would be extremely important to replicate this study with a coach (i.e. golf instructor) that has only received training in behavioral procedures via the TAGteach methodology to see if results would be simi-lar. Because of TAGteach’s already widespread use and acceptance across many different populations and genres, if future research demonstrates that results are similar when implemented by a coach, then addi-tional research should be conducted to determine if TAGteach isa way for behavioral procedures to effectively reach the main-stream population and also if training in TAGteach results in more skillful coaches (TAGteach International, 2009). In addition, if TAGteach proves to produce more effective coaches, then research should assess if effec-tive coaching repertories increase the likelihood that individuals participate and/or continue participation in sports and further-more, if participation results in increasing/maintaining physical activity among adults and youths. Overall, results of this study suggest that TAGteach is effective for training a fairly complex skill set such as a golf swing. Given that this is the first study to demonstrate the effectiveness of TAGteach; more research is needed to establish its value across a variety of skills.

REFERENCES Allison, M. G., & Ayllon, T. (1980). Behavioral coach-

ing in the development of skills in football, gymnastics, and tennis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 297-314.

Anderson, G., & Kirkpatrick, M. A. (2002). Variable effects of a behavioral treatment package on the performance of inline roller speed skaters. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 195-198.

Ericsson, K.A. (2003). Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance in expert per-formance in medicine and related domains. Academic Medicine, 79 (10), 570-581.

Ferguson, D.L., & Rosales-Ruiz, J. (2001). Loading the problem loader: The effects of target training and shaping on trailer-loading behavior of


horses, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 409-424.

Kladopoulos, C. N., & McComas, J. J. (2001). The effects of form training on foul-shooting per-formance in members of a women’s college basketball team. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 329-332.

Krampe, R. T., & Ericsson, K. A. (1996). Maintaining excellence: Deliberate practice and elite per-formance in young and older pianists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125 (4), 331-359.

Langbein, J., Siebert, K., Nuerberg, G., & Mateuffel, G. (2007). The impact of acoustical secondary reinforcement during shape discrimination learning of dwarf goats, Applied Animal Be-haviuor Science, 103, 35-44.

Leadbetter, D. (2005). David Leadbetter: Golf Instruc-tion Series, Well Go USA, Inc.

McCall, C.A., & Burgin, S.E., (2002). Equine utiliza-tion of secondary reinforcement during response extinction and acquisition, Applied Animal Behaviuor Science, 78, 253-262.

McKenzie, T. L., & Rushall, B. (1974). Effects of self-recording on attendance and performance in a competitive swimming training environment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 199-206.

McKeon, T. (2008). Personal communication. April, 28.

Pryor, K. (1999). Don’t shoot the dog: The new art of teaching and training (rev. ed.). New York: Bantam.

Scott, D., Scott, L. M., & Goldwater, B. (1997). A performance improvement program for an in-ternational-level track and field athlete. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 573-575.

Skinner, B.F. (1951). How to Teach Animals, Scien-tific American, 185(12), 26-29.

Smith, S. L., & Ward, P. (2006). Behavioral interven-tions to improve performance in collegiate football. Journal of Applied Behavior Analy-sis, 39, 385-391.

TAGteach International (2009). Retrieved April 8, 2009, from http://www.tagteach.com

TAGteach International. (2004). Using Positive Rein-forcement and Targeted Feedback to Empower your Student and Strengthen your Program, TAGteach International, LLC., Bos-ton, MA.

Ziegler, S. G. (1994). The effects of attentional shift training on the execution of soccer skills: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 545-552.

Action Editor: Mark R. Dixon


e Grip & Address Skill Sets

* The table above is an example of componen and tagpoints for two out of the five skills sets taught in this study. The table does not in lude tagpoints of components that were broken down into more discrete behaviors du ing the actual session. Inclusion in this manuscript is to facilitate understanding of th various behaviors identified and chained together to create a skill set.

Skill Set: Grip Final Tagpoint: Grip

Appendix A: Task Analysis of th

tscre

Description of Components Tagpoint Name (Named by Subject)

1. Arms hang in front Address 2. Grip with right hand (half inch from the end of e

club) and club will lie in palm across the top of e palm (where the fingers meet the palm). Club should form a slight angle in the hand. Start with layin the club on the palm and bottom of the pinkie and ending on the index finger (a finger tip from the top of e index finger)

Angle

th th

g

th

3. Thumb on top of club, tip of thumb pointing down. Check to ensure that the first two knuckles are sible when looking down

Straight thumb vi

4. Apply pressure with the last three fingers No TAG (cannot observe pressure)- practice only

5. Then put the right hand on the club. Club shoul est in the fingers of the right hand (no palm). Over p the little finger with the first two fingers from the l t hand (it should rest on top)

Pinkie

d rlaef

6. Form a gap (half inch) between the index and m ddle finger in the right hand Space i

7. Apply pressure with index finger No TAG (cannot observe pressure)- practice only

8. Wrap right thumb around club Close the bun 9. Push down with right wrist onto the thumb of t left

hand No TAG (cannot observe pressure)- practice

only he

10. Bring club down Grip

Skill Set: Address Final Tagpoint: Address 1. Feet shoulder width apart Mountain Stance 2. Hold club straight out in front No TAG (teaching point that does not need to

become part of the chain) 3. Flex knees (weight is in the balls of the feet, sh ld

only see half of foot) Crouching dragon ou

4. Drop arms down until straight (hands hanging under chin) Draw bridge

5. Bend from hips and stick out rear Goofy 6. Arms relaxed. Check crouching dragon, and ex le to

lean forward. Shoulders are directly over the to No TAG (teaching point that does not need to

become part of the chain) haes


Steps

M T W R F Sa Su

Grip: 1-7 Tag points

Address: 1-4 Tag points Alignment:

Arrow Parallel Square Draw Bridge Grocery list Ball position (where to stand

in relation to the ball):

Statue Shift Mountain Stance Pivot: Bump Crank Back Transfer Switch Turn Through Face Forward Stretch

Strongly Disagree Disagree Slightly Disagree

Slightly Agree

Agree Strongly Agree

I feel ready to move on to the next component of the golf swing

1 2 3 4 5 6

My swing is better after this training

1 2 3 4 5 6

Learning the pivot via TAG is contributing to my long term golf goal

1 2 3 4 5 6

At home practice is beneficial 1 2 3 4 5 6 This intervention is likely to achieve the target goal

1 2 3 4 5 6

Appendix B

Golf Practice Log

For the week of: ________________

Practice for the week: Steps to the Grip, Address, Alignment/Ball & Pivot 3x this weekPlease record how many times you prac ce each step in the boxes below

ti


Appendix C

Date: Behavior Analyst:

Session Scoring Sheet an

d Checklist Review practice log

2 Grip shots -driver -5 iron

5 Swings- from the back (record set-up) -driver -5 iron 5 Swings- from the front (record set-up) -driver -5 iron

TAG review session

TAG session pivot

5 Swings-from back -driver -5 iron 5 Swings from front -driver -5 iron

Data on ball path and distance (5 balls)

Review new practice log


Appendix D

TAGteach Golf Survey Would you recommend this training to a friend? Would you participate in a similar training in the future? What components of this training were beneficial? How were they beneficial? What did you enjoy about the training? What did you like least about the training? Other comments?

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Slightly Disagree

Slightly Agree

Agree Strongly Agree

I feel that I no longer need training on the golf swing

1 2 3 4 5 6

My swing is better after this training 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning the swing via TAG is contributed to my long term golf goal

1 2 3 4 5 6

At home practice is beneficial 1 2 3 4 5 6 This intervention achieved the target goal

1 2 3 4 5 6

vfogel jbhm golf study

Documents