Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 236, Issue 2, pp 539–550 | Cite as

The simplest acquisition protocol is sometimes the best protocol: performing and learning a 1:2 bimanual coordination task

  • Stefan Panzer
  • Deanna Kennedy
  • Chaoyi Wang
  • Charles H. Shea
Research Article

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to determine if the performance and learning of a multi-frequency (1:2) coordination pattern between the limbs are enhanced when a model is provided prior to each acquisition trial. Research has indicated very effective performance of a wide variety of bimanual coordination tasks when Lissajous plots with goal templates are provided, but this research has also found that participants become dependent on this information and perform quite poorly when it is withdrawn. The present experiment was designed to test three forms of modeling (Lissajous with template, Lissajous without template, and limb model), but in each situations, the model was presented prior to practice and not available during the performance of the task. This was done to decrease dependency on the model and increase the development of an internal reference of correctness that could be applied on test trials. A control condition was also collected, where a metronome was used to guide the movement. Following less than 7 min of practice, participants in the three modeling conditions performed the first test block very effectively; however, performance of the control condition was quite poor. Note that Test 1 was performed under the same conditions as used during acquisition. Test 2 was conducted with no augmented information provided prior to or during the performance of the task. Only participants in the limb model condition were able to maintain performance on Test 2. The findings suggest that a very simple intuitive display can provide the necessary information to form an effective internal representation of the coordination pattern which can be used guide performance when the augmented display is withdrawn.

Keywords

Bimanual coordination Perception–action dynamics Polyrhythm Focus of attention Observational learning 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bangert AS, Reuter-Lorenz PA, Walsh CM, Schachter AB, Seidler RD (2010) Bimanual coordination and aging: neurobehavioral implications. Neuropsychologia 48:1165–1170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bingham GP, Schmidt RC, Zaal FTJM. (1999) Visual perception of the relative phasing of human limb movements. Percept Psychophy 61:246–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyle J, Panzer S, Shea CH (2012) Increasingly complex bimanual multi-frequency coordination patterns are equally easy to perform with on-line relative velocity feedback. Exp Brain Res 216:515–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breslin G, Hodges NJ, Williams AM, Curran W, Kremer J (2005) Modelling relative motion to facilitate intra-limb coordination. Hum Move Sci 24:446–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buchanan JJ, Park I (2017) Observation and physical practice: Different practice context lead to similar outcome for the acquisition of kinematic information. Psychol Res 81:83–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Buchanan JJ, Wang C (2012) Overcoming the guidance effect in motor skill learning: feedback all the time can be beneficial. Exp Brain Res 219:305–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchanan JJ, Wright DL (2011) Generalization of action knowledge following observational learning. Acta Psychol 136:167–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buchanan JJ, Ryu YU, Zihlman K, Wright DL (2008) Observational practice of a relative phase pattern but not an amplitude ratio in a multijoint task. Exp Brain Res 191:157–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll WR, Bandura A (1982) The role of visual monitoring in observable learning of action patterns: making the unobservable observable. J Mot Behav 14:153–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Deutsch D (1983) The generation of two isochronous sequences in parallel. Percept Psychophys 34:331–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Fraisse P (1946) Contribution a etude du rythme en tant que forme temporelle. J Psychologie Normale et Pathologique 39:283–304Google Scholar
  12. Hodges NJ, Franks IM (2002) Modeling coaching practice: the role of instruction and demonstration. J Sports Sci 20:793–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hodges NJ, Chua R, Franks IM (2003) The role of video in facilitating perception and action of a novel coordination movement. J Mot Behav 35:247–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu X, Newell KM (2011) Visual information gain and task asymmetry interact in bimanual force coordination and control. Exp Brain Res 212:497–504CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Jancke L, Peters M, Himmelbach M, Nosselt T, Shah J, Steinmetz H (2000) fMRI study of bimanual coordination. Neuropsychologia 38:164–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Jin X, Uygur M, Getchell N, Hall SJ, Jaric S (2011) The effects of instruction and hand dominance on grip-to-load force coordination in manipulation tasks. Neurosci Lett 504:330–335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kelso JAS, Scholz JP, Schöner G (1986) Nonequilibrium phase transitions in coordinated biological motion: critical fluctuations. Phys Lett A 118:279–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelso JAS, Scholz JP, Schöner G (1988) Dynamics governs switching amoung patterns of coordination in biological movement. Phys Lett A 134:8–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kennedy DM, Boyle JB, Shea CH (2013) The role of auditory and visual models in the production of bimanual tapping patterns. Exp Brain Res 224:507–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy DM, Wang C, Panzer S, Shea CH (2016) Continuous scanning trials: transitioning through the attractor landscape. Neurosci Lett 610:66–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kennedy DM, Rhee J, Jimenez J, Shea CH (2017) The influence of asymmetric force requirements on a multi-frequency bimanual coordination task. Hum Mov Sci 51:125–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kovacs AJ, Shea CH (2010) Amplitude differences, spatial assimilation, and integrated feedback in bimanual coordination. Exp Brain Res 202:519–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kovacs AJ, Shea CH (2011) The learning of 90° continuous relative phase with and without Lissajous feedback: external and internally generated bimanual coordination. Acta Psychol 136:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kovacs AJ, Buchanan JJ, Shea CH (2009a) Perception-action coordination dynamics: using scanning trials to assess coordination tendencies. Neurosci Lett 455:162–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kovacs AJ, Buchanan JJ, Shea CH (2009b) Bimanual 1:1 with 90° continuous phase: difficult or easy? Exp Brain Res 193:129–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kovacs AJ, Buchanan JJ, Shea CH (2010a) Perceptual and attentional influences on continuous 2:1 and 3:2 multi-frequency bimanual coordination. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 36:936–954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kovacs AJ, Buchanan JJ, Shea CH (2010b) Impossible is nothing: 5:3 and 4:3 multi-frequency bimanual coordination. Exp Brain Res 201:249–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Maslovat D, Hodges NJ, Krigolson OE, Handy TC (2010) Observational practice benefits are limited to perceptual improvements in the acquisition of a novel coordination skill. Exp Brain Res 204:119–130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. McNevin NH, Shea CH, Wulf G (2003) Increasing the distance of an external focus of attention enhances learning. Psychol Res 67:22–29PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mechsner F, Kerzel D, Knoblich G, Prinz W (2001) Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature 414:69–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Meesen RLJ, Wenderoth N, Temprado JJ, Summers JJ, Swinnen SP (2006) The coalition of constraints during coordination of ipsilateral and heterolateral limbs. Exp Brain Res 174:367–375CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Peper CE, Beek PJ (1998) Distinguishing between the effects of frequency and amplitude on interlimb coupling in tapping a 2:3 polyrhythm. Exp Brain Res 118:78–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Peper CE, Beek PJ, van Wieringen PCW (1995a) Coupling strength in tapping a 2:3 polyrhythm. Hum Move Sci 14:217–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Peper CE, Beek PJ, van Wieringen PCW (1995b) Multifrequency coordination in bimanual tapping: asymmetrical coupling and signs of supercriticality. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21:1117–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Puttemans V, Wenderoth N, Swinnen SP (2005) Changes in brain activation during the acquisition of a multifrequency bimanual coordination task: from the cognitive stage to advanced levels of automaticity. J Neurosci 25:4270–4278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmidt RA, Wulf G (1997) Continuous concurrent feedback degrades skill learning: implication for training and simulation. Hum Factors 39:509–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Semjen A, Ivry RB (2001) The coupled oscillator model of between hand coordination in alternate hand tapping: a reappraisal. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:251–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Shea CH, Wulf G (1999) Enhancing motor learning through external-focus instructions and feedback. Hum Move Sci 18:553–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shea CH, Wulf G, Park JH, Gaunt B (2001) Effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing. J Mot Behav 33:127–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Shea CH, Buchanan JJ, Kennedy D (2016) Perceptual-action influences on discrete and continuous bimanual coordination. Psychon Bull Rev 23:361–386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Summers JJ, Ford SK, Todd JA (1993a) Practice effects on the coordination of the 2 hands in a bimanual tapping task. Hum Mov Sci 12:111–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Summers JJ, Todd JA, Kim YH (1993b) The influence of perceptual and motor factors on bimanual coordination in a polyrhythmic tapping task. Psychol Res 55:107–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Swinnen SP (1996) Information feedback for motor skill learning: a review. In: Zelaznik HN (ed) Advances in motor learning and control. Human Kinetics, Champaign, pp 37–66Google Scholar
  44. Swinnen SP, Wenderoth N (2004) Two hands, one brain: Cognitive neuroscience of bimanual skill. Trends Cogn Sci 8:18–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Swinnen SP, Dounskaia N, Walter CB, Serrien DJ (1997) Preferred and induced coordination modes during the acquisition of bimanual movements with a 2:1 frequency ratio. J Exp Psycho Hum Percept Perform 23:1087–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang C, Kennedy DM, Boyle JB, Shea CH (2013) A guide to performing difficult bimanual coordination tasks: just follow the yellow brick road. Exp Brain Res 230:31–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilson GP (2008) Identifying the information for the visual perception of relative phase. Percept Psychophys 70:465–476CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson AS, Snapp-Childs W, Coats R, Bingham GP (2010) Learning a coordinated rhythmical movement with task-appropriate coordination feedback. Exp Brain Res 205:513–520CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Wulf G (2007) Attention and motor skill learning. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  50. Wulf G (2013) Attentional focus and motor learning: a review of 15 years. Internat Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 6:77–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wulf G, Su J (2007) An external focus of attention enhances golf shot accuracy in beginners and experts. Res Quart Exerc Sport 78:384–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wulf G, Lauterbach B, Toole T (1999) Learning advantages of an external focus of attention in golf. Res Q Exerc Sport 70:120–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Wulf G, McNevin N, Shea CH (2001) The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus. Q J Exp Psychol 54:1143–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wulf G, Gartner M, McConnel N, Schwarz A (2002a) Enhancing the learning of sports skills through external-focus feedback. J Mot Behav 34:171–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Wulf G, McConnel N, Gartner M, Schwarz A (2002b) Feedback attentional focus: enhancing the learning of sport skills through external-focus feedback. J Mot Behav 34:171–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Wulf G, Toellner T, Shea CH (2007) Attentional focus as a function of task difficulty. Res Q Exerc Sport 78:257–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Zanone PG, Kelso JAS (1992) The evolution of behavioral attractors with learning: nonequilibrium phase transitions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:403–421CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Panzer
    • 1
  • Deanna Kennedy
    • 2
  • Chaoyi Wang
    • 3
  • Charles H. Shea
    • 2
  1. 1.Saarland UniversitySaarbrückenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Health and KinesiologyTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  3. 3.College of Physical EducationJilin UniversityChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations