Limits...
The effect of haptic cues on motor and perceptual based implicit sequence learning.

Kim D, Johnson BJ, Gillespie RB, Seidler RD - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Bottom Line: We introduced haptic cues to the serial reaction time (SRT) sequence learning task alongside the standard visual cues to assess the relative contributions of visual and haptic stimuli to the formation of motor and perceptual memories.We adopted the experimental protocol developed by Willingham (1999) to explore whether haptic cues contribute differently than visual cues to the balance of motor and perceptual learning.We found that sequence learning occurs with haptic stimuli as well as with visual stimuli and we found that irrespective of the stimuli (visual or haptic) the SRT task leads to a greater amount of motor learning than perceptual learning.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: HaptiX Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, USA.

ABSTRACT
We introduced haptic cues to the serial reaction time (SRT) sequence learning task alongside the standard visual cues to assess the relative contributions of visual and haptic stimuli to the formation of motor and perceptual memories. We used motorized keys to deliver brief pulse-like displacements to the resting fingers, expecting that the proximity and similarity of these cues to the subsequent response motor actions (finger-activated key-presses) would strengthen the motor memory trace in particular. We adopted the experimental protocol developed by Willingham (1999) to explore whether haptic cues contribute differently than visual cues to the balance of motor and perceptual learning. We found that sequence learning occurs with haptic stimuli as well as with visual stimuli and we found that irrespective of the stimuli (visual or haptic) the SRT task leads to a greater amount of motor learning than perceptual learning.

No MeSH data available.


Mean by group and subgroup of individual median RTs for the training phase (blocks 1–10) and transfer phase (blocks 11–14). Error bars are ± 1 standard error of the mean. R and S stand for pseudorandom and sequenced stimuli, respectively.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3975096&req=5

Figure 3: Mean by group and subgroup of individual median RTs for the training phase (blocks 1–10) and transfer phase (blocks 11–14). Error bars are ± 1 standard error of the mean. R and S stand for pseudorandom and sequenced stimuli, respectively.

Mentions: Reaction times improved with practice regardless of whether the cues were delivered in the visual or the haptic modality. Figure 3 shows the means of individual median RTs computed for both the visual and haptic groups in the training phase and for each of the four subgroups in the transfer phase. Downward trends in RT appeared as participants practiced in the training phase in blocks 2 through 8. Since a pseudorandom block followed sequence block 8, increases in RT occurred at block 9. But RTs decreased again for sequence block 10. Notable drops in RT occurred at the transition from the training phase to the transfer phase (between blocks 10 and 11), which could be expected since the compatible mapping is easier than the incompatible mapping. Also, as expected, decreases in RT appeared at sequence block 13, because participants benefited from knowledge of the sequence acquired during the training phase.


The effect of haptic cues on motor and perceptual based implicit sequence learning.

Kim D, Johnson BJ, Gillespie RB, Seidler RD - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Mean by group and subgroup of individual median RTs for the training phase (blocks 1–10) and transfer phase (blocks 11–14). Error bars are ± 1 standard error of the mean. R and S stand for pseudorandom and sequenced stimuli, respectively.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3975096&req=5

Figure 3: Mean by group and subgroup of individual median RTs for the training phase (blocks 1–10) and transfer phase (blocks 11–14). Error bars are ± 1 standard error of the mean. R and S stand for pseudorandom and sequenced stimuli, respectively.
Mentions: Reaction times improved with practice regardless of whether the cues were delivered in the visual or the haptic modality. Figure 3 shows the means of individual median RTs computed for both the visual and haptic groups in the training phase and for each of the four subgroups in the transfer phase. Downward trends in RT appeared as participants practiced in the training phase in blocks 2 through 8. Since a pseudorandom block followed sequence block 8, increases in RT occurred at block 9. But RTs decreased again for sequence block 10. Notable drops in RT occurred at the transition from the training phase to the transfer phase (between blocks 10 and 11), which could be expected since the compatible mapping is easier than the incompatible mapping. Also, as expected, decreases in RT appeared at sequence block 13, because participants benefited from knowledge of the sequence acquired during the training phase.

Bottom Line: We introduced haptic cues to the serial reaction time (SRT) sequence learning task alongside the standard visual cues to assess the relative contributions of visual and haptic stimuli to the formation of motor and perceptual memories.We adopted the experimental protocol developed by Willingham (1999) to explore whether haptic cues contribute differently than visual cues to the balance of motor and perceptual learning.We found that sequence learning occurs with haptic stimuli as well as with visual stimuli and we found that irrespective of the stimuli (visual or haptic) the SRT task leads to a greater amount of motor learning than perceptual learning.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: HaptiX Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, USA.

ABSTRACT
We introduced haptic cues to the serial reaction time (SRT) sequence learning task alongside the standard visual cues to assess the relative contributions of visual and haptic stimuli to the formation of motor and perceptual memories. We used motorized keys to deliver brief pulse-like displacements to the resting fingers, expecting that the proximity and similarity of these cues to the subsequent response motor actions (finger-activated key-presses) would strengthen the motor memory trace in particular. We adopted the experimental protocol developed by Willingham (1999) to explore whether haptic cues contribute differently than visual cues to the balance of motor and perceptual learning. We found that sequence learning occurs with haptic stimuli as well as with visual stimuli and we found that irrespective of the stimuli (visual or haptic) the SRT task leads to a greater amount of motor learning than perceptual learning.

No MeSH data available.