练习过程中的在线预期线索会干扰有意和偶然的序列学习。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Journal of Motor Behavior Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1080/00222895.2024.2369183
Stephan F Dahm, Daniel Krause
{"title":"练习过程中的在线预期线索会干扰有意和偶然的序列学习。","authors":"Stephan F Dahm, Daniel Krause","doi":"10.1080/00222895.2024.2369183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the Serial Reaction Time Task, participants respond to several stimuli usually being unaware that the stimuli follow a predefined sequence while still learning the sequence. In the present study, we aimed to clearly separate explicit intentional learning from implicit incidental learning by either informing participants about all details of the sequence or not informing participants about the existence of the sequence. Further, we explored the influence of anticipatory cues during practice while anticipatory cues were either presented (extrinsically triggered anticipation) or not presented (self-reliant intrinsic anticipation). Participants were tested before and after practice in the Practice Sequence and a Control Sequence. To test automatization, tests were performed in Single-Task and Dual-Task Blocks. Results showed that after learning with explicit instructions, participants memorized the sequence more deeply and executed the sequence faster than after learning without explicit instructions. Further, by learning with anticipatory cues, participants memorized the sequence less deeply and executed the sequence slower than by learning without anticipatory cues. Unexpectedly, automatization was sequence-unspecific and independent of the practice conditions. In conclusion, detailed explicit prior information about the sequence facilitates sequence learning while anticipatory online cues during practice hamper sequence learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50125,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Motor Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Online Anticipatory Cues During Practice Disrupt Intentional and Incidental Sequence Learning.\",\"authors\":\"Stephan F Dahm, Daniel Krause\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00222895.2024.2369183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the Serial Reaction Time Task, participants respond to several stimuli usually being unaware that the stimuli follow a predefined sequence while still learning the sequence. In the present study, we aimed to clearly separate explicit intentional learning from implicit incidental learning by either informing participants about all details of the sequence or not informing participants about the existence of the sequence. Further, we explored the influence of anticipatory cues during practice while anticipatory cues were either presented (extrinsically triggered anticipation) or not presented (self-reliant intrinsic anticipation). Participants were tested before and after practice in the Practice Sequence and a Control Sequence. To test automatization, tests were performed in Single-Task and Dual-Task Blocks. Results showed that after learning with explicit instructions, participants memorized the sequence more deeply and executed the sequence faster than after learning without explicit instructions. Further, by learning with anticipatory cues, participants memorized the sequence less deeply and executed the sequence slower than by learning without anticipatory cues. Unexpectedly, automatization was sequence-unspecific and independent of the practice conditions. In conclusion, detailed explicit prior information about the sequence facilitates sequence learning while anticipatory online cues during practice hamper sequence learning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Motor Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Motor Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2024.2369183\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Motor Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2024.2369183","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在序列反应时间任务中,被试在对多个刺激做出反应时,通常并不知道这些刺激是按照预先设定的序列进行的,同时仍在学习该序列。在本研究中,我们旨在通过告知被试序列的所有细节或不告知被试序列的存在,明确区分显性有意学习和隐性偶然学习。此外,我们还探讨了在练习过程中预期线索的影响,而预期线索要么出现(外在触发的预期),要么不出现(自我依赖的内在预期)。被试在练习序列和对照序列练习前后接受了测试。为了测试自动化程度,测试在单任务和双任务块中进行。结果显示,与没有明确指令的学习相比,有明确指令的学习之后,学员对序列的记忆更深刻,执行序列的速度更快。此外,与没有预期提示的学习相比,通过预期提示的学习,参与者对序列的记忆更不深刻,执行序列的速度更慢。出乎意料的是,自动化与序列无关,也与练习条件无关。总之,关于序列的详细明确的先验信息有助于序列学习,而练习中的预期在线线索则会阻碍序列学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Online Anticipatory Cues During Practice Disrupt Intentional and Incidental Sequence Learning.

In the Serial Reaction Time Task, participants respond to several stimuli usually being unaware that the stimuli follow a predefined sequence while still learning the sequence. In the present study, we aimed to clearly separate explicit intentional learning from implicit incidental learning by either informing participants about all details of the sequence or not informing participants about the existence of the sequence. Further, we explored the influence of anticipatory cues during practice while anticipatory cues were either presented (extrinsically triggered anticipation) or not presented (self-reliant intrinsic anticipation). Participants were tested before and after practice in the Practice Sequence and a Control Sequence. To test automatization, tests were performed in Single-Task and Dual-Task Blocks. Results showed that after learning with explicit instructions, participants memorized the sequence more deeply and executed the sequence faster than after learning without explicit instructions. Further, by learning with anticipatory cues, participants memorized the sequence less deeply and executed the sequence slower than by learning without anticipatory cues. Unexpectedly, automatization was sequence-unspecific and independent of the practice conditions. In conclusion, detailed explicit prior information about the sequence facilitates sequence learning while anticipatory online cues during practice hamper sequence learning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Motor Behavior
Journal of Motor Behavior 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Motor Behavior, a multidisciplinary journal of movement neuroscience, publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of motor control. Articles from different disciplinary perspectives and levels of analysis are encouraged, including neurophysiological, biomechanical, electrophysiological, psychological, mathematical and physical, and clinical approaches. Applied studies are acceptable only to the extent that they provide a significant contribution to a basic issue in motor control. Of special interest to the journal are those articles that attempt to bridge insights from different disciplinary perspectives to infer processes underlying motor control. Those approaches may embrace postural, locomotive, and manipulative aspects of motor functions, as well as coordination of speech articulators and eye movements. Articles dealing with analytical techniques and mathematical modeling are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信