Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effector dependent sequence learning in the serial RT task

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

At least five earlier studies could not find effector-dependent learning in the keying version of the serial reaction time (RT) task. Experiment 1 examined whether effector-dependent learning occurs when participants practice the serial RT task with three fingers of one hand for about 1,300 sequence repetitions instead of the more common 50–100 repetitions. The results confirm that, following extended practice, sequence learning produces an effector-dependent component. Specifically, an unpracticed hand executed a practiced sequence slower than a practiced hand. However, Experiment 2 showed that effector-dependent sequence learning develops only when fingers of one hand are used, suggesting that effector-dependent sequence learning involves adjustment to the mechanical interactions between the fingers of one hand. In addition, when sequences had been practiced with one hand, mirror versions of the practiced sequences in both experiments showed moderate transfer. But when practiced with two hands no transfer to a mirrored version of the sequence was observed. This suggests that only practice with one hand produces a representation that facilitates the execution of mirror sequences. Generally, the same results were found in more or less aware participants, congruent with the idea that the effector-dependent representation and the representation allowing transfer to mirror sequences are implicit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As the frequencies of the individual keys were unequal, part of the learning effect can be explained by frequency learning. However, frequency learning still implies an effector-independent effect and, hence, cannot be responsible for effector-dependent sequence learning.

References

  • Bapi, R. S., Doya, K., & Harner, A. M. (2000) Evidence for effector independent and dependent representations and their differential time course of acquisition during motor sequence learning. Experimental Brain Research, 132, 149–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkinblit, M. B., & Feldman, A. G. (1988). Some problems of motor control. Journal of Motor Behavior, 20, 369–373.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buchner, A., Steffens, M. C., Erdfelder, E., & Rothkegel, R. (1997). A multinomial model to assess fluency and recollection in a sequence learning task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Experimental Psychology, 50A, 631–663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clohessy, A. B., Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2001). Development of the functional visual field. Acta Psychologica, 106, 51–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A., Ivry, R. B., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criscimagna-Hemminger, S. E., Donchin, O., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Shadmehr, R. (2003). Learned dynamics of reaching movements generalize from dominant to nondominant arm. Journal of Neurophysiology, 89, 168–176.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., Goschke, T., Schlaghecken, F., & Stürmer, B. (1996). Explicit and implicit learning of event sequences: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 970–987.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. R. (1987). Timing of skilled motor performance: Test of the proportional duration model. Psychological Review, 94, 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. R., Larochelle, S., & Grudin, J. T. (1988). Lexical, sublexical, and peripheral effects in skilled typewriting. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 524–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. B. (1995). Functional mapping of sequence learning in normal humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 497–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. B. (1998). Abstract and effector-specific representations of motor sequences identified with PET. Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 9420–9428.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grafton, S. T., Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Motor sequence learning with the nondominant left hand. A PET functional imaging study. Experimental Brain Research, 146, 369–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, H. (1996). Coordination. In H. Heuer & S. W. Keele (Eds.), Handbook of perception and action, Vol. 2 (pp. 121–180). London: Academic.

  • Heyes, C. M., & Foster, C. L. (2002). Motor learning by observation. Evidence from a serial reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 593–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, R. E. (1974). Asymmetry of bilateral transfer. American Journal of Psychology, 87, 667–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka, O., Nakahara, H., Rand, M. K., Sakai, K., Lu, X., Nakamura, K., Miyachi, S., & Doya, K. (1999). Parallel neural networks for learning sequential procedures. Trends in Neuroscience, 22, 465–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka, O., Sakai, K., Nakahara, H., Lu, X., Miyachi, S., Nakamura, K., & Rand, M. K. (2000). Neural mechanisms for learning of sequential procedures. In M. S. Gazzaniga (ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences (pp. 553–572). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

  • Hlûstik, P., Solodkin, A., Gullapalli, R. P., Noll, D. C., & Small, S. L. (2002). Functional lateralization of the human premotor cortex during sequential movements. Brain & Cognition, 49, 54–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, J., Sebald, A., & Stöcker, C. (2001). Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in SRT tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 470–482.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, M. I. (1995). The organization of action sequences: Evidence from a relearning task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 179–192.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Karni, A., Meyer, G., Rey-Hipolito, C., Jezzard, P., Adams, M. M., Turner, R., & Ungerleider, L. G. (1998). The acquisition of skilled motor performance: Fast and slow experience-driven changes in primary motor cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 95, 861–868.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keele, S. W., Ivry, R. B., Hazeltine, E., Mayr, U., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representations. Psychological Review, 110, 316–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kent, R. D., & Minifie, F. D. (1977). Coarticulation in recent speech production models. Journal of Phonetics, 5, 115–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2000). The role of stimulus-based and response-based spatial information in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 863–882.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kornbrot, D. E. (1989). Organization of keying skills: The effect of motor complexity and number of units. Acta Psychologica, 70, 19–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahy, J. M. (1924). Motion study in typewriting. In Studies and reports: Series J (Educational), 3. Geneva: International Labour Office.

  • Lindemann, P. G., & Wright, C. E. (1998). Skill acquisition and plans for actions: Learning to write with your other hand. In D. Scarborough & S. Sternberg (Eds.), Methods, models, and conceptual issues. An invitation to cognitive science, Vol. 4 (pp. 523–584). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

  • MacKay, D. G. (1982). The problems of flexibility, fluency, and speed-accuracy trade-off in skilled behavior. Psychological Review, 89, 483–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 350–364.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, M. J., & Wolff, P. H. (1997). A functional analysis of human mirror movements. Journal of Motor Behavior, 29, 85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nattkemper, D., & Prinz, W. (1997). Stimulus and response anticipation in a serial reaction task. Psychological Research, 60, 98–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, J.-H., & Shea, C. H. (2003). Effect of practice on effector independence. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35, 33–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker-Taillon, D., & Kerr, R. (1989). Manual asymmetries within the performance of a complex motor task. Human Movement Science, 8, 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Leone, A., Grafman, J., & Hallett, M. (1994). Modulation of cortical motor output maps during development of implicit and explicit knowledge. Science, 263, 1286–1289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew, R. W. (1974). Levels of analysis in motor control. Brain Research, 71, 393–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rand, M. K., Hirosaka, O., Miyachi, S., Lu, X., Nakamura, K., Kitaguchi, K., & Shimo, Y. (2000). Characteristics of sequential movements during early learning in monkeys. Experimental Brain Research, 131, 293–304.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 584–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, D. A., Meulenbroek, R. J., & Vaughan, J. (1999). Remembered positions: Stored locations or stored postures? Experimental Brain Research, 124, 503–512.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rüsseler, J., & Rösler, F. (2000). Implicit and explicit learning of event sequences: Evidence for distinct coding of perceptual and motor representations. Acta Psychologica, 104, 45–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmuckler, M. A., & Bosman, E. L. (1997). Interkey timing in piano performance and typing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 99–111.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., Zuccolotto, A., & Tirone, S. T. (1993). Time-stamping computer events to report 1-msec accuracy of events in the Micro Experimental Laboratory. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 276–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seger, C. A. (1994). Implicit learning. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 163–196.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, L. H. (1975). Multiple attention in continuous verbal tasks. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 157–167). New York: Academic.

  • Stadler, M. A. (1989). On learning complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1061–1069.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, S., Monsell, S., Knoll, R. L., & Wright, C. E. (1978). The latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: comparisons of speech and typewriting. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information processing in motor control and learning (pp. 117–152). New York: Academic.

  • Verwey, W. B., & Wright, D. (2004). Effector-independent and effector-dependent learning in the discrete sequence production task. Psychological Research, 68, 64–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wachs, K., Pascual-Leone, A., Grafman, J., & Hallett, M. (1994). Intermanual transfer of implicit knowledge of sequential finger movements. Neurology, 44, Supplement 2, 805S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willingham, D. B. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 105, 558–584.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Willingham, D. B. (1999). Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Memory and Cognition, 27, 561–572.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Willingham, D. B., Wells, L. A., Farrell, J. M., & Stemwedel, M. E. (2000). Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations. Memory & Cognition, 28, 366–375.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, P. H., Gunnoe, C. E., & Cohen, C. (1983). Associated movements as a measure of developmental age. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 25, 417–429.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zirngibl, C., & Koch, I. (2002). The impact of response mode on implicit and explicit sequence learning. Experimental Psychology, 49, 153–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Behavioral Sciences, University of Twente, PO Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Willem B. Verwey

  2. Institut für Arbeitsphysiologie an der Universität Dortmund, Ardeystrasse 67, 44129, Dortmund, Germany

    Willem B. Verwey

  3. Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA

    Benjamin A. Clegg

Authors
  1. Willem B. Verwey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin A. Clegg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Willem B. Verwey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verwey, W.B., Clegg, B.A. Effector dependent sequence learning in the serial RT task. Psychological Research 69, 242–251 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-004-0181-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-004-0181-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation