Abstract
Nissen and Bullemer (1987) reported that implicit motor sequence learning was disrupted by the addition of a secondary task. They suggested that this effect was due to the attentional load that the secondary task adds. Recently it has been suggested that the attentional load is not critical, but rather that the secondary task affects timing, either by lengthening or by making inconsistent the response-tostimulus interval (RSI)-that is, the delay between when a subject makes a response and when the next stimulus appears. In six experiments we manipulated the RSI and found no support for these two hypotheses. An inconsistent RSI did not adversely affect implicit motor sequence learning. A long RSI did not affect learning, although under some conditions subjects did not express learning if the RSI was long. These results are interpreted as reflecting the effects of attention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., &Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 17–30.
Cohen, N. J., &Eichenbaum, H. (1993).Memory, amnesia, and the hippocampal system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Curran, T., &Keele, S. W. (1993). Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 188–202.
Frensch, P. A., Lin, J., & Buchner, A. (in press). Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tonecounting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction time task.Psychological Research.
Frensch, P. A., &Miner, C. S. (1994). Effects of presentation rate and individual differences in short-term memory capacity on an indirect measure of serial learning.Memory & Cognition,22, 95–110.
Glisky, E. L., Schacter, D. L., &Tulving, E. (1986). Computer learning by memory impaired patients: Acquisition and retention of complex knowledge.Neuropsychologia,24, 313–328.
Glucksberg, S., &Cowan, G. N. (1970). Memory for nonattended auditory material.Cognitive Psychology,1, 149–156.
Graf, P., &Schacter, D. L. (1985). Implicit and explicit memory for new associations in normal and amnesic subjects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 501–518.
Keele, S. W., &Jennings, P. J. (1992). Attention in the representation of sequence: Experiment and theory.Human Movement Science,11, 125–138.
Nissen, M. J., &Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures.Cognitive Psychology,19, 1–32.
Schacter, D. L., Chiu, C. Y. P., &Ochsner, K. N. (1993). Implicit memory: A selective review.Annual Review of Neuroscience,16, 159–182.
Squire, L. R., Knowlton, B., &Musen, G. (1993). The structure and organization of memory.Annual Review of Psychology,44, 453–495.
Stadler, M. A. (1992). Statistical structure and implicit serial learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 318–327.
Stadler, M. A. (1993). Implicit serial learning: Questions inspired by Hebb (1961).Memory & Cognition,21, 819–827.
Stadler, M. A. (1995). The role of attention in implicit learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 674–685.
Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M. J., &Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 1047–1060.
Willingham, D. B. (1997).Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Willingham, D.B., Greenberg, A.R. & Thomas, R.C. Response-to-stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning, but does affect performance. Mem Cogn 25, 534–542 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201128
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201128