@phdthesis{Berner2007,
  author    = {Berner, Michael P.},
  title     = {Sensory and motor components of highly skilled action sequences},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-23324},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {A series of experiments was conducted in order to investigate motor contributions to learning highly skilled action sequences in contrast to sensory contributions. Experiments 1-4 made use of a bimanual-bisequential variant of the serial reaction time task: Presentation of imperative stimuli was arranged such that participants' left-hand and right-hand responses followed different sequences independently of one another, thus establishing a compound sequence spanning both hands. At least partly independent learning of the two concurrently implemented hand-related sequences was demonstrated after extensive practice under condi-tions of both simultaneous (Experiments 1 \& 2) and alternating (Experiments 3 \& 4) stimulus presentation and responding. It persisted when there was only one imperative stimulus for presenting both hand-related sequences (Experiments 2-4) instead of two separate imperative stimuli (Experiments 1 \& 2), one for each sequence, even when the hand-related sequences were correlated and massive integrated learning of the compound sequence occurred (Ex-periment 4). As for the nature of the independently acquired sequence representations, trans-ferable sequence knowledge was acquired only when there was a separate imperative stimulus for each sequence (Experiments 1 \& 2) but not otherwise (Experiments 2-4). The most likely stimulus-based representations which allow for intermanual transfer can be regarded as sen-sory components of highly skilled action sequences, whereas motor components can be con-sidered as being reflected in effector-specific, non-transferable sequence knowledge. The same decomposition logic applies to transferable and non-transferable sequence knowledge observed under conditions of unimanual practice of a single sequence (Experiments 6 \& 7). The advantage of practicing a key press sequence with fingers of one hand as opposed to practicing it with fingers of both hands (Experiment 5) also implicates a motor component as the two assignments were equivalent in all other respects. Moreover, Experiments 6 and 7 showed that hand-specific sequence knowledge can develop after relatively little practice (as little as approximately 120 sequence repetitions). Presumably, this occurs especially in tasks with particularly pronounced requirements for coarticulation between consecutive finger movements. In sum, the present series of experiments provides compelling evidence for an effector-specific component of sequence learning. Albeit relatively small in size, it emerged consistently under various conditions. By contributing to the refinement of sequential action execution it can play a role in attaining high levels of performance.},
  language  = {en}
}