Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Master Thesis (1)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- intermanueller Transfer (2) (remove)
Institute
Participants trained aiming movements of the right hand to several targets with a prism-like virtual displacement of the location of one of the targets, receiving either terminal or continuous visual feedback. After training, the same targets were to be reached with the untrained left hand under manipulated feedback conditions. The right hand movements continuously adapted to the unnoticed visual displacement, significantly less with continuous than with terminal feedback. Under terminal but not under continuous feedback the adaptation to the manipulated target generalized to targets in the same horizontal direction but not to targets in the opposite direction. Finally, the movements of the untrained left hand showed the same qualitative changes to the targets as the movements of the trained right hand. The data are in line with the notion that the adaptation of the right hand movements is mainly based on a re-interpretation of target locations on which movement control of both hands draws.
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.