Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 2/2006

01-03-2006 | Original Article

Perceptual or motor learning in SRT tasks with complex sequence structures

Auteurs: Natacha Deroost, Eric Soetens

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2006

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

We investigated under which conditions sequence learning in a serial reaction time task can be based on perceptual learning. A replication of the study of Mayr (1996) confirmed perceptual and motor learning when sequences were learned concurrently. However, between-participants manipulations of the motor and perceptual sequences only supported motor learning in cases of more complex deterministic and probabilistic sequence structures. Perceptual learning using a between-participants design could only be established with a simple deterministic sequence structure. The results seem to imply that perceptual learning can be facilitated by a concurrently learned motor sequence. Possibly, concurrent learning releases necessary attentional resources or induces a structured learning condition under which perceptual learning can take place. Alternatively, the underlying mechanism may rely on binding between the perceptual and motor sequences.
Voetnoten
1
Although Experiments 2–4 show no trend toward perceptual learning, it could be remarked that more statistical power in these experiments is required in order to accept an absence of perceptual learning. Therefore, to determine whether perceptual learning effects would come about when statistical power was increased, we conducted a repeated measures ANOVA on the combined data of the perceptual conditions of all three Experiments 2–4, with sequence structure (32, 12 or probabilistic in Experiments 2, 3, and 4 respectively) as between-participants factor and block as within-participants factor. With a total sample size of 48 participants, neither the main effect of sequence structure nor the interaction between block and sequence proved to be significant respectively F(2,45) = .95, p = .40 and F(18,405) = .81, p = .70. This allowed us to further analyze perceptual learning in the form of an increase in RT in the random Block 9 compared with the surrounding structured Blocks 8 and 10. Even across 48 participants, planned comparisons revealed that perceptual learning did not emerge, F(1,45) = 1.48, p = .23. Hence, the combined analysis of the data of Experiments 2–4 shows that perceptual learning is still absent when the statistical power is increased. Nevertheless, we were always able to assess clear motor learning effects in Experiments 2–4, although the samples used to assess motor and perceptual learning were always comparable. This indicates that a lack of statistical power probably cannot explain the absence of perceptual learning in Experiments 2–4. Even if it is assumed that perceptual learning in Experiments 2–4 was indeed present, but that the effect was so small that it required more statistical power (than motor learning) to be detected, the difference between the motor and perceptual condition remains. Hence, it can only be concluded that sequence learning primarily relies on motor learning and that this type of learning is much more dominant than perceptual learning.
 
2
We would like to thank the reviewers for these suggestions.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Bischoff-Grethe, A., Goedert, K. M., Willingham, D. B., & Grafton, S. T. (2004). Neural substrates of response-based sequence learning using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 127–138.CrossRefPubMed Bischoff-Grethe, A., Goedert, K. M., Willingham, D. B., & Grafton, S. T. (2004). Neural substrates of response-based sequence learning using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 127–138.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253. Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253.
go back to reference Cock, J. J., Berry, D. C., & Buchner, A. (2002). Negative priming and sequence learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 24–48.CrossRef Cock, J. J., Berry, D. C., & Buchner, A. (2002). Negative priming and sequence learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 24–48.CrossRef
go back to reference Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16, 17–30.CrossRef Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16, 17–30.CrossRef
go back to reference Frensch, P. A., & Miner, C. (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. Frensch, P. A., & Miner, C. (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.
go back to reference Frensch, P. A., Buchner, A., & Lin, J. (1994). Implicit learning of unique and ambiguous serial transitions in the presence and absence of a distractor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 567–584.CrossRef Frensch, P. A., Buchner, A., & Lin, J. (1994). Implicit learning of unique and ambiguous serial transitions in the presence and absence of a distractor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 567–584.CrossRef
go back to reference Frensch, P. A., Lin, J., & Buchner, A. (1998). Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tone-counting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction time task. Psychological Research, 61, 83–98.CrossRef Frensch, P. A., Lin, J., & Buchner, A. (1998). Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tone-counting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction time task. Psychological Research, 61, 83–98.CrossRef
go back to reference Goschke, T. (1998). Implicit learning of perceptual and motor sequences: Evidence for independent learning systems. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.). Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 401–444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Goschke, T. (1998). Implicit learning of perceptual and motor sequences: Evidence for independent learning systems. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.). Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 401–444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
go back to reference Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. (1995). Functional anatomy of sequence learning in normal humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 497–510. Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. (1995). Functional anatomy of sequence learning in normal humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 497–510.
go back to reference Heuer, H., Schmidtke, V., & Kleinsorge, T. (2001). Implicit learning of sequences of tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 967–983.CrossRef Heuer, H., Schmidtke, V., & Kleinsorge, T. (2001). Implicit learning of sequences of tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 967–983.CrossRef
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183–216. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183–216.
go back to reference Howard, J. H., Mutter, S. A., & Howard D. V. (1992). Serial pattern learning by event observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 1029–1039.CrossRef Howard, J. H., Mutter, S. A., & Howard D. V. (1992). Serial pattern learning by event observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 1029–1039.CrossRef
go back to reference Keele, S. W., Jennings, P., Jones, S., Caulton, D., & Cohen, A. (1995). On the modularity of sequence representation. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 17–30. Keele, S. W., Jennings, P., Jones, S., Caulton, D., & Cohen, A. (1995). On the modularity of sequence representation. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 17–30.
go back to reference Kelly, S. W., & Burton, M. A. (2001). Learning complex sequences: No role for observation? Psychological Research, 65, 15–23.CrossRefPubMed Kelly, S. W., & Burton, M. A. (2001). Learning complex sequences: No role for observation? Psychological Research, 65, 15–23.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Koch, I. (2001). Automatic and intentional activation of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 1474–1486.CrossRef Koch, I. (2001). Automatic and intentional activation of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 1474–1486.CrossRef
go back to reference Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2000). The role of stimulus-based and response-based spatial information in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 26, 863–882. Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2000). The role of stimulus-based and response-based spatial information in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 26, 863–882.
go back to reference Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 350–364.CrossRef Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 350–364.CrossRef
go back to reference Nattkemper, D. & Prinz, W. (1997). Stimulus and response anticipation in a serial reaction task. Psychological Research, 60, 98–112.CrossRef Nattkemper, D. & Prinz, W. (1997). Stimulus and response anticipation in a serial reaction task. Psychological Research, 60, 98–112.CrossRef
go back to reference Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.
go back to reference Notebaert, W., & Soetens, E. (2003). The influence of irrelevant stimulus changes on stimulus and response repetition effects. Acta Psychologica, 112, 143–156.CrossRefPubMed Notebaert, W., & Soetens, E. (2003). The influence of irrelevant stimulus changes on stimulus and response repetition effects. Acta Psychologica, 112, 143–156.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 585–594.CrossRef Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 585–594.CrossRef
go back to reference Remillard, G. (2003). Pure perceptual-based sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 518–597. Remillard, G. (2003). Pure perceptual-based sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 518–597.
go back to reference Rüsseler, J., & Rösler, F. (2000). Implicit and explicit learning of event sequences: evidence for distinct coding of perceptual and motor responses. Acta Psychologica, 104, 45–67.CrossRefPubMed Rüsseler, J., & Rösler, F. (2000). Implicit and explicit learning of event sequences: evidence for distinct coding of perceptual and motor responses. Acta Psychologica, 104, 45–67.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rüsseler, J., Münte, T. F., & Rösler, F. (2002). Influence of stimulus distance in implicit learning of spatial and nonspatial event sequences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 973–987.PubMed Rüsseler, J., Münte, T. F., & Rösler, F. (2002). Influence of stimulus distance in implicit learning of spatial and nonspatial event sequences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 973–987.PubMed
go back to reference Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as factor in secondary-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53–71.CrossRef Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as factor in secondary-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53–71.CrossRef
go back to reference Schneider, W. (1996). MEL Professional. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools. Schneider, W. (1996). MEL Professional. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
go back to reference Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime, Version 1.1. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime, Version 1.1. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
go back to reference Shanks, D. R., & St. John, M. F. (1994). Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 367–447. Shanks, D. R., & St. John, M. F. (1994). Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 367–447.
go back to reference Shin, J. C., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Concurrent learning of temporal and spatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 28, 445–457. Shin, J. C., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Concurrent learning of temporal and spatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 28, 445–457.
go back to reference Stadler, M. A., & Frensch, P. A. (1998). Handbook of implicit learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stadler, M. A., & Frensch, P. A. (1998). Handbook of implicit learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
go back to reference Stadler, M. A., & Neely, C. B. (1997). Effects of sequence length and structure on implicit serial learning. Psychological Research, 60, 14–23.CrossRef Stadler, M. A., & Neely, C. B. (1997). Effects of sequence length and structure on implicit serial learning. Psychological Research, 60, 14–23.CrossRef
go back to reference Willingham, D. B. (1999). Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Memory and Cognition, 27, 561–572. Willingham, D. B. (1999). Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Memory and Cognition, 27, 561–572.
go back to reference Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M., & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1047–1060.CrossRef Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M., & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1047–1060.CrossRef
go back to reference Willingham, D. B., Wells, L. A., Farrell, J. M., & Stemwedel, M. E. (2000). Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations. Memory and Cognition, 28, 366–375. Willingham, D. B., Wells, L. A., Farrell, J. M., & Stemwedel, M. E. (2000). Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations. Memory and Cognition, 28, 366–375.
go back to reference Ziessler, M. (1994). The impact of motor responses on serial pattern learning. Psychological Research, 57, 30–41.PubMed Ziessler, M. (1994). The impact of motor responses on serial pattern learning. Psychological Research, 57, 30–41.PubMed
go back to reference Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 962–978.CrossRef Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 962–978.CrossRef
go back to reference Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, P. (2001). Learning of event sequences is based on response-effect learning: Further evidence from a serial reaction time task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 595–613.CrossRef Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, P. (2001). Learning of event sequences is based on response-effect learning: Further evidence from a serial reaction time task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 595–613.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Perceptual or motor learning in SRT tasks with complex sequence structures
Auteurs
Natacha Deroost
Eric Soetens
Publicatiedatum
01-03-2006
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2006
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-004-0196-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2006

Psychological Research 2/2006 Naar de uitgave