Limits...
Stimulus-dependent modulation of perceptual and motor learning in a serial reaction time task.

Kirsch W, Hoffmann J - Adv Cogn Psychol (2012)

Bottom Line: Two sequences were used, in which structural regularities occurred either in the horizontal or in the vertical locations of successive stimuli.This pattern of results was independent of whether three fingers (Experiment 1) were used or only one finger (Experiment 2) was used for responding.This result suggests that perceptual and motor learning mechanisms may be weighted differently depending on the context in which the stimulus is presented.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Würzburg, Germany.

ABSTRACT
In two experiments, we investigated the impact of spatial attributes on the representation acquired during a serial reaction time task. Two sequences were used, in which structural regularities occurred either in the horizontal or in the vertical locations of successive stimuli. After training with the dominant hand, participants were required to respond with the non-dominant hand to either the original sequence or to a mirror-ordered version of the original sequence that required finger movements homologous to those used during training. We observed that a difference in reaction times between the two transfer conditions was smaller in the vertical sequence than in the horizontal sequence. This pattern of results was independent of whether three fingers (Experiment 1) were used or only one finger (Experiment 2) was used for responding. This result suggests that perceptual and motor learning mechanisms may be weighted differently depending on the context in which the stimulus is presented.

No MeSH data available.


Mean intermanual transfer costs (reaction time differences between Block14 and structured transfer blocks) as a function of the learned sequenceand transfer type. Error bars represent standard errors.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3376890&req=5

Figure 3: Mean intermanual transfer costs (reaction time differences between Block14 and structured transfer blocks) as a function of the learned sequenceand transfer type. Error bars represent standard errors.

Mentions: To assess the completeness of the intermanual transfer, the RT differencesbetween the intermanual transfer blocks, in which the original sequence(parallel condition) or its mirrored version (mirror condition) were presented,and the last training block (i.e., Block 14) were computed. An analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) performed on these transfer costs with the Sequence as thebetween-subjects factor and the Transfer Type as the within-subjects factorrevealed a significant main effect of the transfer type, F(1,26) = 94.62, p < .001, partial η2 =.784.More importantly, it revealed a significant Transfer Type × Sequenceinteraction, F(1, 26) = 6.23, p = .019,partial η2 = .193. As shown in Figure 3, the difference between the costs following the paralleltransfer and the costs following the mirror transfer was significantly largerfor the horizontal sequence (131 ms) compared with the vertical sequence (77ms).


Stimulus-dependent modulation of perceptual and motor learning in a serial reaction time task.

Kirsch W, Hoffmann J - Adv Cogn Psychol (2012)

Mean intermanual transfer costs (reaction time differences between Block14 and structured transfer blocks) as a function of the learned sequenceand transfer type. Error bars represent standard errors.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3376890&req=5

Figure 3: Mean intermanual transfer costs (reaction time differences between Block14 and structured transfer blocks) as a function of the learned sequenceand transfer type. Error bars represent standard errors.
Mentions: To assess the completeness of the intermanual transfer, the RT differencesbetween the intermanual transfer blocks, in which the original sequence(parallel condition) or its mirrored version (mirror condition) were presented,and the last training block (i.e., Block 14) were computed. An analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) performed on these transfer costs with the Sequence as thebetween-subjects factor and the Transfer Type as the within-subjects factorrevealed a significant main effect of the transfer type, F(1,26) = 94.62, p < .001, partial η2 =.784.More importantly, it revealed a significant Transfer Type × Sequenceinteraction, F(1, 26) = 6.23, p = .019,partial η2 = .193. As shown in Figure 3, the difference between the costs following the paralleltransfer and the costs following the mirror transfer was significantly largerfor the horizontal sequence (131 ms) compared with the vertical sequence (77ms).

Bottom Line: Two sequences were used, in which structural regularities occurred either in the horizontal or in the vertical locations of successive stimuli.This pattern of results was independent of whether three fingers (Experiment 1) were used or only one finger (Experiment 2) was used for responding.This result suggests that perceptual and motor learning mechanisms may be weighted differently depending on the context in which the stimulus is presented.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Würzburg, Germany.

ABSTRACT
In two experiments, we investigated the impact of spatial attributes on the representation acquired during a serial reaction time task. Two sequences were used, in which structural regularities occurred either in the horizontal or in the vertical locations of successive stimuli. After training with the dominant hand, participants were required to respond with the non-dominant hand to either the original sequence or to a mirror-ordered version of the original sequence that required finger movements homologous to those used during training. We observed that a difference in reaction times between the two transfer conditions was smaller in the vertical sequence than in the horizontal sequence. This pattern of results was independent of whether three fingers (Experiment 1) were used or only one finger (Experiment 2) was used for responding. This result suggests that perceptual and motor learning mechanisms may be weighted differently depending on the context in which the stimulus is presented.

No MeSH data available.