The parameter remapping effect in human performance: Evidence from tongue twisters and finger fumblers

https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90045-8Get rights and content

Abstract

This article describes a series of experiments which show that motor performance suffers when responses in a repeated sequence have variable rather than fixed parameter mappings. In speech production, repeated recitation of the beginning of the alphabet is slowed dramatically if the same letters have different stress levels on successive cycles; the same effect holds for vowel-consonant relationships. In keyboard performance, repetitions of fingertapping sequences suffer if the number of consecutive taps by the same finger changes from cycle to cycle; we call these difficult sequences finger fumblers. Finally, similar effects are obtained with violin playing. The model we develop to account for these results says that parameter values mapped to the subprogram for a response item persist after the subprogram has been executed, and that extra processing is required if a new parameter value must be mapped to the subprogram the next time it is called for. This account is consistent with the view that motor programs for forthcoming actions are prepared by editing motor programs for actions that have just been completed. Because our results are similar to interference effects in traditional memory studies, we also suggest that similar mechanisms underlie storage and retrieval of motor responses and symbolic materials.

References (24)

  • D.A. Rosenbaum

    The movement precuing technique: Assumptions, applications, and extensions

  • S. Sternberg et al.

    The latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: Comparisons of speech and typewriting

  • J.R. Anderson

    The architecture of cognition

    (1983)
  • J. Ceraso

    The interference theory of memory

    Scientific American

    (1967)
  • N. Cohen et al.

    Preserved learning and retention of pattern-analyzing skill in amnesia: Dissociation of knowing how and knowing that

    Science

    (1980)
  • R. Collard et al.

    Theory of serial pattern production: Tree traversals

    Psychological Review

    (1982)
  • L. Hasher et al.

    Automatic and effortful processes in memory

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

    (1979)
  • A.W. Inhoff et al.

    Stimulus-response compatibility and motor programming of manual response sequences

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1984)
  • N.F. Johnson

    Coding processes in memory

  • S.W. Keele

    Behavioral analysis of movement

  • P. Ladefoged

    A course in phonetics

    (1975)
  • R.G. Marteniuk et al.

    Information processing in movement organization and execution

  • Cited by (79)

    • Language production under message uncertainty: When, how, and why we speak before we think

      2023, Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory
    • Ideomotor learning: Time to generalize a longstanding principle

      2022, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
    • Two types of backward crosstalk: Sequential modulations and evidence from the diffusion model

      2019, Acta Psychologica
      Citation Excerpt :

      The crucial difference between the two experiments is that in the present experimental setup two trial transitions comprise 50% of exact response repetitions; this did not occur in the data from the reanalyzed experiment. The sped-up responses with response repetitions (Rosenbaum et al., 1986) were apparently reflected in non-decision time t0. Thus, while it seems clear that a part of processing responsible for the sequential modulation is attributable to RS-related processing, some part also is due to repetitions of responses, if those are present.

    • What's your number? The effects of trial order on the one-target advantage

      2018, Acta Psychologica
      Citation Excerpt :

      When performing a voluntary movement, the preparation and organization of the motor response may be facilitated if the movement is the same as on the preceding trial. Indeed, there may be a benefit in having to reproduce the same movement compared to preparing and organizing a different movement (e.g., Fischman & Lim, 1991; Rosenbaum & Jorgensen, 1992; Rosenbaum, Weber, Hazelett, & Hindorff, 1986). For instance, Rosenbaum and Jorgensen (1992) had participants touch one end of a dowel (i.e., black or white end) to a corresponding number located on the edge of a shelf on a 14-shelf bookcase.

    • Moving in space and time

      2024, Cognitive Control of Action: Selected Works of David A. Rosenbaum
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The research was supported by Grant BNS-8408634 from the National Science Foundation and Research Career Development Award 1 K04 NS00942-01 from the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke to the first author.

    1

    The first two authors began collaborating on this project while D.A.R. was a visiting scientist at the MIT Center for Cognitive Science, under a grant from the A. P. Sloan Foundation's Particular Program in Cognitive Science, and R.J.W. was a Visiting Scholar at the Department of Psychology and Social Relations, Harvard University, on leave from Oklahoma State University.

    2

    William M. Hazelett is currently at the Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 01003.

    View full text