Eye movements are not a prerequisite for learning movement sequence timing through observation

The present experiment examined learning of a three-segment movement sequence using physical or observational practice, and whether permitting eye movements to be made during observation is a prerequisite for learning such a movement sequence. Specifically, participants were required to move a mouse cursor through a three-segment movement sequence in order to satisfy one of three movement time goals (800, 1000, 1200 ms). A yoked-participant design was used in which a physical practice group acted as a learning model, which was viewed simultaneously by two groups that carried out different observational practice procedures. An observation group was permitted to move their eyes whilst observing the model, whereas the fixation group was instructed to maintain fixation on a central target. The difference between pre-test and post-test data indicated that all the three experimental groups significantly altered their timing accuracy, variability and movement kinematics over practice, while the control group’s behaviour was unchanged. These data indicate that movement time as well as the underlying movement control was learned following observation of a movement with or without an explicit contribution from eye movements, albeit to a lesser extent during the final segment of the sequence when compared to the physical practice group. The implication is that while similar processes might normally be involved in physical and observational practice, information afforded by eye movements during observation (e.g., efference copy and eye proprioception) is not necessary for movement sequence learning.     

Cognitive Processes Underlying Observational Learning of Motor Skills

There is evidence indicating that an individual can learn a motor skill by observing a model practising it. In the present study we wanted to determine whether observation would permit one to learn the relative timing pattern required to perform a new motor skill. Also, we wanted to determine the joint effects of observation and of physical practice on the learning of that relative timing pattern. Finally, we were interested in finding whether there was an optimal type of model, advanced or beginner, which would lead better to observational learning. Data from two experiments indicated that observation of either a beginner or an advanced model resulted in modest learning of a constrained relative timing pattern. Observation also resulted in significant parameterization learning. However, a combination of observation followed by physical practice resulted in significant learning of the constrained relative timing pattern. These results suggest that observation engages one in cognitive processes similar to those occurring during physical practice.     

Motor learning by observation: Evidence from a serial reaction time task

This study sought evidence of observational motor learning, a type of learning in which observation of the skilled performance of another person not only facilitates motor skill acquisition but does so by contributing to the formation of effector-specific motor representations. Previous research has indicated that observation of skilled performance engages cognitive processes similar to those occurring during action execution or physical practice, but has not demonstrated that these include processes involved in effector-specific representation. In two experiments, observer subjects watched the experimenter performing a serial reaction time (SRT) task with a six-item unique sequence before sequence knowledge was assessed by response time and/or free generation measures. The results suggest that: (1) subjects can acquire sequence information by watching another person performing the task (Experiments 1-2); (2) observation results in as much sequence learning as task practice when learning is measured by reaction times (RTs) and more than task practice when sequence learning is measured by free generation performance (Experiment 2, Part 1); and (3) sequence knowledge acquired by model observation can be encoded motorically--that is, in an effector-specific fashion (Experiment 2, Part 2).     

Effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing

The effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing were examined. In 2 experiments, participants attempted to learn to produce a 1,000- or 1,600-ms sequence of 5 key presses with a specific relative-timing pattern. In each experiment, participants were, or were not, provided an auditory model that consisted of a series of tones that were temporally spaced according to the criterion relative-timing pattern. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 14) given the auditory template exhibited better relative- and absolute-timing performance than participants (n = 14) not given the auditory template. In Experiment 2, auditory and no-auditory template groups again were tested, but in that experiment each physical practice participant (n = 16) was paired during acquisition with an observer (n = 16). The observer was privy to all instructions as well as auditory and visual information that was provided the physical practice participant. The results replicated the results of Experiment 1: Relative-timing information was enhanced by the auditory template for both the physical and observation practice participants. Absolute timing was improved only when the auditory model was coupled with physical practice. Consistent with the proposal of D. M. Scully and K. M. Newell (1985), modeled timing information in physical and observational practice benefited the learning of the relative-timing features of the task, but physical practice was required to enhance absolute timing.     

Physical and observational practice afford unique learning opportunities

In 2 experiments, the authors studied the effectiveness of physical and observational practice on learning and the effect on learning of combining physical practice and observation, as compared with providing physical practice alone. In Experiment 1, retention and transfer performance of 30 university students after physical, observational, or no practice were contrasted. Consistent with findings from other studies, the retention results indicated that observational practice is inferior to physical practice. The transfer data indicated no differences between observation and physical practice groups. In Experiment 2, retention and transfer performance of 30 participants in physical and combined (alternating physical and observational) practice groups were contrasted. The retention results showed no differences between the combined and physical practice groups, but the combined group performed significantly better than the physical practice group on the transfer test. Those findings suggest that a combination of observation and physical practice permits unique opportunities for learning beyond those available via either practice regimen alone.     

Physical and Observational Practice Afford Unique Learning Opportunities

In 2 experiments, the authors studied the effectiveness of physical and observational practice on learning and the effect on learning of combining physical practice and observation, as compared with providing physical practice alone. In Experiment 1, retention and transfer performance of 30 university students after physical, observational, or no practice were contrasted. Consistent with findings from other studies, the retention results indicated that observational practice is inferior to physical practice. The transfer data indicated no differences between observation and physical practice groups. In Experiment 2, retention and transfer performance of 30 participants in physical and combined (alternating physical and observational) practice groups were contrasted. The retention results showed no differences between the combined and physical practice groups, but the combined group performed significantly better than the physical practice group on the transfer test. Those findings suggest that a combination of observation and physical practice permits unique opportunities for learning beyond those available via either practice regimen alone.     

Scheduling observational and physical practice: influence on the coding of simple motor sequences

The main purpose of the present experiment was to determine the coordinate system used in the development of movement codes when observational and physical practice are scheduled across practice sessions. The task was to reproduce a 1,300-ms spatial-temporal pattern of elbow flexions and extensions. An intermanual transfer paradigm with a retention test and two effector (contralateral limb) transfer tests was used. The mirror effector transfer test required the same pattern of homologous muscle activation and sequence of limb joint angles as that performed or observed during practice, and the non-mirror effector transfer test required the same spatial pattern movements as that performed or observed. The test results following the first acquisition session replicated the findings of Gruetzmacher, Panzer, Blandin, and Shea (2011) . The results following the second acquisition session indicated a strong advantage for participants who received physical practice in both practice sessions or received observational practice followed by physical practice. This advantage was found on both the retention and the mirror transfer tests compared to the non-mirror transfer test. These results demonstrate that codes based in motor coordinates can be developed relatively quickly and effectively for a simple spatial-temporal movement sequence when participants are provided with physical practice or observation followed by physical practice, but physical practice followed by observational practice or observational practice alone limits the development of codes based in motor coordinates.     

Effects of an Auditory Model on the Learning of Relative and Absolute Timing

The effects of an auditory model on the learning of relative and absolute timing were examined. In 2 experiments, participants attempted to learn to produce a 1,000- or 1,600-ms sequence of 5 key presses with a specific relative-timing pattern. In each experiment, participants were, or were not, provided an auditory model that consisted of a series of tones that were temporally spaced according to the criterion relative-timing pattern. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 14) given the auditory template exhibited better relative- and absolute-timing performance than participants (n = 14) not given the auditory template. In Experiment 2, auditory and no-auditory template groups again were tested, but in that experiment each physical practice participant (n = 16) was paired during acquisition with an observer (n = 16). The observer was privy to all instructions as well as auditory and visual information that was provided the physical practice participant. The results replicated the results of Experiment 1: Relative-timing information was enhanced by the auditory template for both the physical and observation practice participants. Absolute timing was improved only when the auditory model was coupled with physical practice. Consistent with the proposal of D. M. Scully and K. M. Newell (1985), modeled timing information in physical and observational practice benefited the learning of the relative-timing features of the task, but physical practice was required to enhance absolute timing.     

Rate of processing and judgment of response speed: comparing the effects of alcohol and practice

Both alcohol and practice affect choice reaction time. The present study was conducted to investigate the possibility that impairment from alcohol and improvement with practice could be attributed to changes in the efficiency of control mechanisms (Rabbitt, 1979a), some of which depend upon the ability to judge response speed accurately. Twenty subjects participated in a four-choice reaction time experiment in which they received no alcohol (NA) in Session 1 and either no alcohol (10 subjects) or 0.8 ml alcohol (A) per kilogram of body weight (10 subjects) in Session 2. The task was to respond as fast and as accurately as possible to each stimulus. In addition, subjects were required to press a fifth key after any response that they considered to be both fast and accurate. Subjects had no difficulty in performing this task: (1) there was a significant difference of 122 msec between the mean response time for correct responses indicated as fast and that for correct responses not indicated as fast, and (2) subjects indicated 1 in 4 correct responses but only 1 in 64 errors. Alcohol increased all response times by approximately 40 msec. In contrast, practice decreased response times less for correct responses not indicated as fast than for correct responses indicated as fast. The ability to distinguish between fast and slow responses was thus unaffected by alcohol, but was improved by practice. Responses indicated as "fast" were significantly faster than errors, and appeared to occur without warning (unlike errors, which tended to end a sequence of increasingly fast correct responses). The results suggest that alcohol and practice influence choice reaction time in qualitatively different ways: Alcohol impairs overall response speed but has no effect on the ability to judge response speed, whereas practice improves both.     

On the cognitive processes underlying contextual interference and observational learning

The main goal of the present study was to determine whether observation of an unskilled model learning a timing task enables the observer to develop a cognitive representation of the task similar to the one acquired through physical practice (Adams, 1986; Bandura, 1977; Lee & White, 1990). To reach that goal, we tested whether a contextual interference effect would be obtained in a retention test of subjects who had observed an individual practicing three variations of a timing task under a random or a blocked schedule of practice. Similar patterns of results in an immediate retention test were found following observation and physical practice. This suggests that observation indeed engaged the observers in the same type of cognitive activities as did physical practice. Moreover, a schedule of practice made up of 100% physical practice led to improved learning compared with a schedule of practice made up of 50% observation followed by 50% physical practice. This suggests that learning is enhanced more by numerous implementations of a motor program than by its mere construction or retrieval.     

Beyond the answer: post-error processes

When you suspect that you just gave an erroneous answer to a question you stop and rethink. Suspected errors lead to a shift in the control and content of cognitive processes. In the present experiment we investigated the influence of errors upon heart rates and response latencies. Sixty-four subjects participated in an experiment in which each subject solved a sequence of 60 verbal analogies. The results demonstrated increased latencies after errors and decelerated heart rates during the post-error period. The results were explained by a psychophysiological model in which the septo-hippocampal system functions as a control system which coordinates the priority and selection of cognitive processes. Error detection suppresses strategies which otherwise prevent looping and iterative reanalyses of old material. The inhibition is also responsible for the cardiac slowing during the post-error period.     

An event-related potential study on the observation of erroneous everyday actions

Recent experiments have demonstrated that error-related negativity (ERN) is not only elicited when people commit errors, but also when they observe others committing errors. The present study investigates whether this observed ERN is also present when participants observe execution errors in an everyday context. Participants observed short sequences of pictures showing steps of everyday actions ending either erroneously or correctly. Participants were instructed to indicate by a delayed response whether the observed action was correctly executed or not. The results showed a large P300 for execution errors compared with the observation of correct sequences, but no ERN activity was found. The present experiment indicates that the detection of execution errors in observation does not rely on the error processing mechanism responsible for generating the ERN. The increased P300 amplitudes suggest a more general monitoring process that signals that the occurrence of unexpected events is involved in the detection of execution errors.     

What does a man do after he makes an error? an analysis of response programming

When people make errors during continuous tasks they temporarily pause and then slow down. One line of explanation has been that they monitor feedback to detect errors, that they may make incidental responses when errors occur (e.g. they may swear) and that they may pause to analyse their errors. In all these cases they may be assumed to act as single channel information processing systems of limited capacity, and to be unable to recognise any new signal until these processes have been completed.

Analysis of response after errors shows that this cannot be the case. Responses after errors are inaccurate, but are not slow when they require the subject to make the response which he should have made on the previous trial (i.e. to make an error correction response). Subjects thus must recognise new signals as soon as they occur. The present results require a new model of error detection and correction, and a model for response programming and priming.     

Observation and physical practice: coding of simple motor sequences

An experiment was conducted to determine the coordinate system used in the development of movement codes during observation and utilized on later physical practice performance of a simple spatial-temporal movement sequence. The task was to reproduce a 1.3-s spatial-temporal pattern of elbow flexions and extensions. An intermanual transfer paradigm with a retention test and two transfer tests was used: a mirror transfer test where the same pattern of muscle activation and limb joint angles was required and a nonmirror transfer test where the visual-spatial pattern of the sequence was reinstated on the transfer test. The results indicated a strong advantage for participants in the physical practice condition when transferred to the mirror condition in which the motor coordinates (e.g., pattern of muscle activation and joint angles) were reinstated relative to transfer performance when the visual-spatial coordinates were reinstated (visual and spatial location of the target waveform). The observation group, however, demonstrated an advantage when the visual-spatial coordinates were reinstated. These results demonstrate that codes based in motor coordinates can be developed relatively quickly for simple rapid movement sequences when participants are provided physical practice, but observational practice limits the system to the development of codes based in visual-spatial coordinates. Performances of control participants, who were not permitted to practise or observe the task, were quite poor on all tests.     

Response latencies in the yes/no detection task: An assessment of two basic models

Two general forms of model for response latency in the yes no signal detection task are described and their predictions examined in the light of experimental data. One model supposes a latency function along the detection axis and the other supposes that a count is made of multiple observation, Experiment I looks at the auditory detection situation with short observation interval, but the results are generally equixocal, although the latency function model gives a simpler interpretation Other results are then discussed, particularly those of Gescheider et al (1969). and it is concluded that an attempt must be made to replicate the results of Carterette et al (1965) for the extended observation interval detection experiment. This is achieved in Experiment II. and the obtained order of mean latencies is then examined in terms of the models The counting model appears by far the more suitable for this situation.     

The role of scheduling in learning through observation

In the 2 experiments reported in the present article, participants (N = 40, Experiment 1; N = 60, Experiment 2) learned to solve complex puzzles under different schedules of physical practice, observation, or a combination of the two. The results of both studies indicated that observation, in the absence of any physical practice, allows the development of an accurate but relatively nonfunctional cognitive representation. The data suggest that, even when the motor demands are minimal, the functional significance of the cognitive representation is not maximally realized until physical interaction with the task is possible. Thus, providing the participant with an interspersed practice schedule during acquisition enables that interaction to occur, thereby allowing the absolute number of physical practice trials to be reduced and replaced by observation trials, but leading to equivalent learning.     

The role of knowledge of results frequency in learning through observation

The authors examined whether reduced knowledge of results (KR) frequency during observation of a model's performance enhances learning. As they viewed a timing task, observers (n = 54) received KR about the model's performance on each trial (100% KR) or on 1 out of 3 trials (33% KR). Controls (n = 18) received only physical practice; they did not take part in the observation session. The authors also wanted to dissociate the guidance effect of KR during physical practice from the guidance role played by the representation acquired during observation. Therefore, following the observation phase, participants physically performed the task with either the same or a different KR frequency than that experienced during observation. The effects of observation and physical practice on learning were assessed in delayed retention tests. The beneficial effect of reduced KR frequency during observation continued for the following physical practice phases. Possible explanations as to why KR influences observational learning are discussed.     

What causes specificity of practice in a manual aiming movement: vision dominance or transformation errors?

The withdrawal of vision of the arm during a manual aiming task has been found to result in a large increase in aiming error, regardless of the amount of practice in normal vision before its withdrawal. In the present study, the authors investigated whether the increase in error reflects the domination of visual afferent information over the movement representation developed during practice to the detriment of other sources of afferent information or whether it reflects only transformation errors of the location of the target from an allocentric to an egocentric frame of reference. Participants (N = 40) performed aiming movements with their dominant or nondominant arm in a full-vision or target- only condition. The results of the present experiment supported both of those hypotheses. The data indicated that practice does not eliminate the need for visual information for optimizing movement accuracy and that learning is specific to the source or sources of afferent information more likely to ensure optimal accuracy during practice. In addition, the results indicated that movement planning in an allocentric frame of reference might require simultaneous vision of the arm and the target. Finally, practice in a target-only condition, with knowledge of results, was found to improve recoding of the target in an egocentric frame of reference.     

Effects of Pointing Rate and Availability of Visual Feedback on Visual and Proprioceptive Components of Prism Adaptation

The withdrawal of vision of the arm during a manual aiming task has been found to result in a large increase in aiming error, regardless of the amount of practice in normal vision before its withdrawal. In the present study, the authors investigated whether the increase in error reflects the domination of visual afferent information over the movement representation developed during practice to the detriment of other sources of afferent information or whether it reflects only transformation errors of the location of the target from an allocentric to an egocentric frame of reference. Participants (N = 40) performed aiming movements with their dominant or nondominant arm in a full-vision or target-only condition. The results of the present experiment supported both of those hypotheses. The data indicated that practice does not eliminate the need for visual information for optimizing movement accuracy and that learning is specific to the source or sources of afferent information more likely to ensure optimal accuracy during practice. In addition, the results indicated that movement planning in an allocentric frame of reference might require simultaneous vision of the arm and the target. Finally, practice in a target-only condition, with knowledge of results, was found to improve recoding of the target in an egocentric frame of reference.     

The Role of Scheduling in Learning Through Observation

In the 2 experiments reported in the present article, participants (N = 40, Experiment 1; N = 60, Experiment 2) learned to solve complex puzzles under different schedules of physical practice, observation, or a combination of the two. The results of both studies indicated that observation, in the absence of any physical practice, allows the development of an accurate but relatively nonfunctional cognitive representation. The data suggest that, even when the motor demands are minimal, the functional significance of the cognitive representation is not maximally realized until physical interaction with the task is possible. Thus, providing the participant with an interspersed practice schedule during acquisition enables that interaction to occur, thereby allowing the absolute number of physical practice trials to be reduced and replaced by observation trials, but leading to equivalent learning.