Advertisement

Psychological Research

, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 119–133 | Cite as

Secondary-task effects on sequence learning

  • Herbert Heuer
  • Volker Schmidtke
Original Article

Abstract

With a repeated sequence of stimuli, performance in a serial reaction-time task improves more than with a random sequence. The difference has been taken as a measure of implicit sequence learning. Implicit sequence learning is impaired when a secondary task is added to the serial RT task. In the first experiment, secondary-task effects on different types of sequences were studied to test the hypothesis that the learning of unique sequences (where each sequence element has a unique relation to the following one) is not impaired by the secondary task, while the learning of ambiguous sequences is. The sequences were random up to a certain order of sequential dependencies, where they became deterministic. Contrary to the hypothesis, secondary-task effects on the learning of unique sequences were as strong or stronger than such effects on the learning of ambiguous sequences. In the second experiment a hybrid sequence (with unique as well as ambiguous transitions) was used with different secondary tasks. A visuo-spatial and a verbal memory task did not interfere with the learning of the sequence, but interference was observed with an auditory go/no-go task in which high- and low-pitched tones were presented after each manual response and a foot pedal had to be pressed in response to high-pitched tones. Thus, interference seems to be specific to certain secondary tasks and may be related to memory processes (but most likely not to visuo-spatial and verbal memory) or to the organization of sequences, consistent with previous suggestions.

Keywords

Unique Sequence Verbal Memory Secondary Task Sequence Learning Previous Suggestion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Annett, J. (1986). On knowing how to do things. In H. Heuer & C. Fromm (Eds.),Generation and modulation of action patterns (pp. 187–200). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Annett, J. (1995), Motor imagery: perception or action?Neuropsychologia, 33, 1395–1417.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baddeley, A. D. (1986).Working memory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Baddeley, A. D., & Lieberman, K. (1980). Spatial working memory, In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.),Attention and Performance VII (pp. 521–539), Hillsdale, N, J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Baddeley, A. D., Grant, S., Wight, E., & Thomson, N. (1975). Imagery and visual working memory. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.),Attention and Performance V (pp. 205–217), New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Berry, D. C., & Broadbent, D, E. (1988). Interactive tasks and the implicit-explicit distinction.British Journal of Psychology, 79, 251–272.Google Scholar
  7. Brooks, L. R. (1967). The suppression of visualization in reading.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19, 289–299.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, A., Ivry, R. L. & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning,Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.Google Scholar
  10. Curran, T., & Keele, S. W. (1993). Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 189–202.Google Scholar
  11. Dienes, Z., Broadbent, D., & Berry, D. (1991). Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 875–887.Google Scholar
  12. Engelkamp, J., (1991).Das menschliche Gedächtnis. Das Erinnern von Sprache. Bildern und Handlungen (2nd ed.). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  13. 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.Google Scholar
  14. Goschke, T, (1994). Prozedurales Lernen von strukturierten Ereignissequenzen. Paper read at the Workshop “Sequenzlernen, Bewußtsein und Aufmerksamkeit”, Schwerte.Google Scholar
  15. Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. (in press). Functional mapping of sequence learning in normal humans.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.Google Scholar
  16. Hay, J. C. (1974). Motor transformation learning, Perception, 3, 487–496.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hayes, N., & Broadbent, D. E. (1988). Two modes of learning for interactive tasks.Cognition, 28, 249–276.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Heuer, H. (1983).Bewegungslernen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  19. Heuer, H. (1985). Some points of contact between models of central capacity and factor analytic models.Acta Psychologica, 60, 135–155.Google Scholar
  20. Heuer, H. (1989). A multiple-representations' approach to mental practice of motor skills. In B. Kirkcaldy (Ed.),Normalities and abnormalities in human movement (pp. 36–57), Basel: Karger.Google Scholar
  21. Heuer, H. (1991). Motor constraints in dual-task performance. In D. L. Damos (Ed.),Multiple-task performance (pp. 173–204), London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  22. Heuer, H. (1996). Doppeltätigkeiten. In O. Neumann & A. F. Sanders (Eds.),Enzyklopädie der Psychologie C II 2: Aufmerksamkeit (pp. 163–218). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  23. Keele, S. W., & Jennings, P. J. (1992). Attention in the representation of sequence: Experiment and theory.Human Movement Science, 11, 125–138.Google Scholar
  24. Kerr, B. (1973). Processing demands during mental operations.Memory & Cognition, 1, 401–412.Google Scholar
  25. Logie, R., Baddeley, A. D., Mane, A., Donchin, E., & Sheptak, R. (1989).Working memory in the acquisition of complex cognitive skills.Acta Psychologica, 71, 53–87.Google Scholar
  26. Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979), On the economy of the human processing system.Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.Google Scholar
  27. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements for learning: Evidence from performance measures.Cognitive Psychology, 1987, 1–32.Google Scholar
  28. Povel, D.-J. & Collard, R. (1982). Structural factors in patterned finger tapping.Acta Psychologica, 52, 107–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219–235.Google Scholar
  30. Reber, A. S. (1992). The cognitive unconscious: An evolutionary perspective.Consciousness & Cognition, 1, 93–133.Google Scholar
  31. Rosenbaum, D. A., Kenny, S. B., & Derr, M. A. (1983). Hierarchical control of rapid movement sequences.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 86–102.Google Scholar
  32. Schmidt, R. A. (1988).Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis, Champaign, III.: Human Kinetics Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Seger, C. A. (1994),Implicit learning.Psychological Bulletin, 115, 163–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Stadler, M. A. (1992). Statistical structure and implicit serial learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 318–327.Google Scholar
  35. Stadler, M. A. (1995). Role of attention in implicit learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 674–685.Google Scholar
  36. Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1047–1060.Google Scholar
  37. Zießler, M., Hänel, K., & Sachse, D. (1990). The programming of structural properties of movement sequences.Psychological Research, 52, 347–358.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herbert Heuer
    • 1
  • Volker Schmidtke
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Arbeitsphysiologie an der Universität DortmundDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations