The schematic representation of effector function underlying perceptual-motor skill

Conceptual and methodological problems related to Schmidt' (1975) motor schema theory are discussed. In particular, the motor schema is interpreted as representing the dynamics of the system being controlled, which may or may not be associated with a referent movement pattern. Furthermore, it is suggested that prior familiarity with a control system's dynamics is a critical but uncontrolled factor in tests of the theory, and largely accounts for their equivocal findings. These ideas are examined by two experiments in which subjects had to bimanually control the movement of a computer-displayed cursor along a track on a CRT screen. Different track orientations required different patterns of movement not entailing a single generalized motor program. Experiment 1 shows that variable track performance with a given control system, results in better transfer to novel tracks than does fixed practice. Experiment 2 demonstrates that altering the control system disrupts performance whether or not the required movements remain the same. These results indicate the need for a fundamental modification of schema theory, such that a schematic representation of effector-environment relations (effector function) is available independently of particular movement patterns used in its acquisition.     

The effect of type of practice on motor learning in children

The present investigation was concerned with the variability-of-practice hypothesis of Schmidt's schema theory of motor learning; i. e. it was sought to determine if there is an optimal way to structure the variable practice session with regard to schema formation. Furthermore, children's motor recognition (movement evaluation) was examined, in addition to recall (movement production), since apparently no such studies had been done within the context of schema theory before. Eighty-eight girls and boys with a mean age of 11.3 years were tested on a throwing task. Three groups of subjects practised under variable conditions (different target distances and weights) that differed with regard to contextual interference and sequential organization of task variations; another group received constant throwing practice. Following practice trials with knowledge of results, the four treatment groups and a control group without prior practice were required to produce and evaluate a novel response (novel target distance and weight) without vision and knowledge of results. The results supported the variability-of-practice hypothesis, in that variable practice in general facilitated recall and recognition on the novel task. Furthermore, variable practice with the highest level of contextual interference (random order of tasks) produced most effective transfer performance, suggesting that the structure of the variable-practice session in fact plays a role with regard to the effectiveness of motor schema development. Contrary to the ‘organization hypothesis’ (Gentile and Nacson, 1976) a hierarchical organization of movement variations was not more beneficial to schema formation than random practice.     

Influence of Practice Schedule on Testing Schema Theory Predictions in Adults

Since the publication of Schmidt’s (1975) schema theory of motor learning, numerous studies have assessed the variability of practice hypothesis. Of these, only research using children as subjects has provided consistent results. Findings from adult studies have been equivocal. Two experiments were conducted to assess the possibility that the schedule of variable practice during acquisition may be a clue to this equivocality, since only experiments (using adults as subjects) that have provided random variability of practice conditions have consistently supported the tenets of schema theory. Using a two movement rapid timing task, subjects learned to control their actions under one (constant) or four (variable) parameters, with variable practice conducted under either a blocked or a randomized schedule. Results for variable error and absolute constant error showed that random-variable practice provided strong support for the schema theory prediction, whereas blocked-variable practice provided only relatively weak support. Two contrasting implications of these results are discussed with respect to support versus non-support for Schmidt’s schema theory.     

Strength Recovery Patterns Following Isometric and Isotonic Exercise

In 3 experiments, the author tested the hypothesis that coordination dynamics is the content of a generalized motor program (GMP) for rhythmic interlimb coordination. In Experiment 1, learners (N = 14) practiced a ?90° movement with either identically timed or differently timed limbs. Both acquisition and transfer to novel (effector and pattern) timings were unaffected by the learning condition and were suggestive of the intrinsic dynamics for in-phase and antiphase. In Experiment 2, learners' (N = 13) acquisition of 2 different phase relations (?90° and ?45°) was qualitatively identical. Attractor reconstruction revealed an increase in the predictability of individual movement trajectories and a decrease in attractor dimensionality over learning. Transfer for both ?90° and ?45° was again suggestive of the intrinsic dynamics. In Experiment 3, learning altered participants' (N = 8) performance of in-phase and antiphase relations. Together, the results suggested a single continuum of phase relations, called an attractor landscape, that produces similar patterns of CE and VE for both previously stable and learned coordinations.     

Performance and Learning of Generalized Motor Programs: Relative (GMP) and Absolute (Parameter) Errors

The effects of practice (Experiment 1) and parameter variability (Experiment 2) on the learning of generalized motor programs (GMPs) and movement parameterization were investigated In each experiment, 2 tasks with different relative force-time structures were tested. Participants (N = 32, Experiment (N = 40, Experiment 2) attempted to exert a pattern of force that resembled in force and time a waveform that was displayed on a computer monitor. In both experiments, the analysis suggested that the GMP, although refined over practice, was relatively stable (i.e., resistant to decay and interference), even early in practice (after 20 trials). In addition, the results indicated that constant and variable parameter practice did not differentially affect GMP learning but did degrade the learning of the parameter that was not varied. The data provided additional evidence for the dissociation of the GMP and the parameterization processes proposed in GMP theory. Contrary to schema theory, the present data suggest an interdependence between the force and the time parameters: The manipulation of 1 of the parameters has a negative effect on the learning of the other parameter.     

Inter-manual transfer and practice: Coding of simple motor sequences

Previous research suggests that movements are represented early in practice in visual-spatial coordinates/codes, which are effector independent, and later in practice in motor coordinates/codes (e.g., joint angles, activation patterns), which are effector dependent. In the present experiments, the task was to reproduce 1.3 s patterns of elbow flexions and extensions. An inter-manual transfer paradigm was used in Experiment 1 and an inter-manual practice paradigm was used in Experiment 2. The present results clearly indicated a strong advantage of effector transfer when the motor coordinates available during acquisition were reinstated (Experiment 1) and demonstrate that inter-manual practice with the same motor coordinates results in enhanced retention performance relative to transfer and practice where the same visual-spatial coordinates are used. These results demonstrate that the more effective movement code (motor or visual-spatial) is dependent on the movement sequence characteristics (e.g., difficulty, number of elements, and mode of control [preplanned or on-line]). These results are also interesting because they indicate, contrary to previous findings with more complex movement sequences, that an effective motor code can be developed relatively early in practice for rapid movement sequences.     

The memory representation of motor skills: a test of schema theory

Currently, a popular model for the central representation of motor skills is embodied in Schmidt's schema theory of discrete motor skill learning (Schmidt, 1975). Two experiments are reported here that contrast predictions from a schema abstraction model that is the basis for schema theory with those from an exemplar-based model of motor skill memory representation. In both experiments, subjects performed 300 trials per day of three variations of a three-segment timing task over 4 days of acquisition. The subjects then either immediately transferred to four novel variations of the same task (Experiment 1) that varied in degree of similarity to the exemplars experienced during acquisition; or performed two novel and two previously produced exemplars, following 24-h and 1-week retention intervals (Experiment 2). The results indicated that novel task transfer was not affected by the degree of similarity between the acquisition and transfer exemplars, and that there was no advantage for a previously produced exemplar over a novel exemplar after either a 24-hr or 1 week retention interval. Also, in both experiments, a consistent pattern of bias in responding was noted for novel task transfer and retention. These results are indicative of a schema abstraction model of memory representation for motor skills.     

Schema theory: a critical appraisal and reevaluation

The authors critically review a number of the constructs and associated predictions proposed in schema theory (R. A. Schmidt, 1975). The authors propose that new control and learning theories should include a reformulated (a) notion of a generalized motor program that is not based on motor program but still accounts for the strong tendency for responses to maintain their relative characteristics; (b) mechanism or processes whereby an abstract movement structure based on proportional principles (e.g., relative timing, relative force) is developed through practice; and (c) explanation for parameter learning that accounts for the benefits of parameter variability but also considers how variability is scheduled. Furthermore, they also propose that new theories of motor learning must be able to account for the consistent findings spawned as a result of the schema theory proposal and must not be simply discounted because of some disfavor with the motor program notion, in general, or schema theory, more specifically.     

Memory Drum Theory

Two experiments investigated the memory drum theory’s prediction (Henry & Rogers, 1960) that simple reaction time (SRT) increased with the complexity of the response to be initiated. Experiment 1 (N = 9) matched the Experiment 1, Group 1, SRT condition described by Henry and Rogers. Results of Experiment 1 replicated those of Henry and Rogers and indicated that the memory drum theory’s prediction of increased SRT as a function of increased complexity of response was tenable. Experiment 2 (N = 11) tested the effects of anatomical unit, extent, and target size on SRT, premotor time, and motor time. The results supported the contention that alternative explanations for SRT were possible. With complexity constant, increases in anatomical unit lead to increases in SRT, but only in the motor time component which indicated electromechanical rather than neuromotor program delays. It is proposed that the increased motor time could be explained by peripheral events such as the duration maximum torque must be applied by the agonist muscle(s) to generate the angular acceleration required to initiate rapid movement. SRT, premotor time, and motor time increased when target size was reduced from 6.35 cm to .79 cm. The increased premotor time could be a function of the determining of new equilibrium points for the elbow joint during response initiation. No effects on SRT were observed for extent.     

Evidence for recognition and recall schemata

Two experiments manipulated elements postulated to be crucial for the formation of recognition and recall schemata for discrete motor skills. Experiment 1 tested predictions for the formation of a schema to recognize novel and practiced positioning movements. Sensations of practiced locations, followed by knowledge of results, enabled accurate judgment of movement extent. The specification of distances before active practice movements did not help recognition performance. To test recall schema, Experiment 2 allowed practice with active movements over specified distances, or unspecified passive movements. The allowance of response specifications during practice provided clear superiority of recall-dependent performance. This aspect of recall memory should enable the construction of movements with extents and velocities different from those practiced.     

A Note on Schema and Exemplar Approaches to Motor Skill Representation in Memory

Given the need for a memory representation of well-learned motor skills, a common assumption in motor behavior is that this knowledge is stored in a central, abstracted form. Active production of motor skills has not been used in experimental designs that have provided empirical support for this view of representation, however. Much of the faith in centralized, abstracted forms of memory representation for motor skills is due to the popularity of Schmidt's schema theory, which has adapted the prototype abstraction model from category learning research to the representation of motor skills. Since schema theory was proposed, however, an alternative view that seriously questions the preeminence of the prototype abstraction model for the central representation of knowledge has arisen in the category learning literature. This particular view, termed the specific exemplar model, has led a number of researchers in cognition to develop mixed models that involve both prototypic abstraction and specific exemplar elements. This note, then, identifies what can be perceived as a gap in the empirical knowledge base in motor behavior and discusses the possibility of using the debate about representation for category learning as a stimulus for initiating a similar investigation into the representation of motor skills. A hypothetical specific exemplar model for the memory representation of motor skills is outlined, and possible empirical comparisons between this model and the schema abstraction model are suggested.     

Factors that affect action possibility judgements: Recent experience with the action and the current body state

It has been suggested that action possibility judgements are formed through a covert simulation of the to-be-executed action. We sought to determine whether the motor system (via a common coding mechanism) influences this simulation, by investigating whether action possibility judgements are influenced by experience with the movement task (Experiments 1 and 2) and current body states (Experiment 3). The judgement task in each experiment involved judging whether it was possible for a person's hand to accurately move between two targets at presented speeds. In Experiment 1, participants completed the action judgements before and after executing the movement they were required to judge. Results were that judged movement times after execution were closer to the actual execution time than those prior to execution. The results of Experiment 2 suggest that the effects of execution on judgements were not due to motor activation or perceptual task experience—alternative explanations of the execution-mediated judgement effects. Experiment 3 examined how judged movement times were influenced by participants wearing weights. Results revealed that wearing weights increased judged movement times. These results suggest that the simulation underlying the judgement process is connected to the motor system, and that simulations are dynamically generated, taking into account recent experience and current body state.     

The role of context on boundary extension

Boundary extension (BE) is a memory error in which observers remember more of a scene than they actually viewed. This error reflects one’s prediction that a scene naturally continues and is driven by scene schema and contextual knowledge. In two separate experiments we investigated the necessity of context and scene schema in BE. In Experiment 1, observers viewed scenes that either contained semantically consistent or inconsistent objects as well as objects on white backgrounds. In both types of scenes and in the no-background condition there was a BE effect; critically, semantic inconsistency in scenes reduced the magnitude of BE. In Experiment 2 when we used abstract shapes instead of meaningful objects, there was no BE effect. We suggest that although scene schema is necessary to elicit BE, contextual consistency is not required.     

Is It Possible to Prepare the Second Component of a Movement Before the First One?

Experiment 1 utilized a choice reaction time paradigm to examine whether advance information about the second component of a movement has similar effects upon movement initiation and execution as advance information about the first component. Four stimuli were assigned to four goal keys. Subjects responded with the index finger of their preferred hand. They had to press one of two intermediate keys before pressing the assigned stimulus goal key. Advance information signaled one pair of goal keys in such a way that either the first or the second movement component was unequivocally specified before the response signal appeared. Shorter reaction times resulted when the first component was precued. Further control conditions showed that advance information about the second movement component could not be utilized for movement preparation. Experiment 2 ruled out a perceptual interpretation of this effect. Experiment 3 showed that preparation time for two-component movements are longer than for one-component movements. The study permits the conclusions that speeded two-component movements are controlled by motor programs and that advance information about the first movement component is required before the second movement component can be programmed.     

Enhanced encoding of the co-actor's target stimuli during a shared non-motor task

Task co-representation has been proposed to rely on the motor brain areas’ capacity to represent others’ action plans similarly to one's own. The joint memory (JM) effect suggests that working in parallel with others influences the depth of incidental encoding: Other-relevant items are better encoded than non-task-relevant items. Using this paradigm, we investigated whether task co-representation could also emerge for non-motor tasks. In Experiment 1, we found enhanced recall performance to stimuli relevant to the co-actor also when the participants’ task required non-motor responses (counting the target words) instead of key-presses. This suggests that the JM effect did not depend on simulating the co-actor's motor responses. In Experiment 2, direct visual access to the co-actor and his actions was found to be unnecessary to evoke the JM effect in case of the non-motor, but not in case of the motor task. Prior knowledge of the co-actor's target category is sufficient to evoke deeper incidental encoding. Overall, these findings indicate that the capacity of task co-representation extends beyond the realm of motor tasks: Simulating the other's motor actions is not necessary in this process.     

Pragmatic reasoning schemas

We propose that people typically reason about realistic situations using neither content-free syntactic inference rules nor representations of specific experiences. Rather, people reason using knowledge structures that we term pragmatic reasoning schemas, which are generalized sets of rules defined in relation to classes of goals. Three experiments examined the impact of a “permission schema” on deductive reasoning. Experiment 1 demonstrated that by evoking the permission schema it is possible to facilitate performance in Wason's selection paradigm for subjects who have had no experience with the specific content of the problems. Experiment 2 showed that a selection problem worded in terms of an abstract permission elicited better performance than one worded in terms of a concrete but arbitrary situation, providing evidence for an abstract permission schema that is free of domain-specific content. Experiment 3 provided evidence that evocation of a permission schema affects not only tasks requiring procedural knowledge, but also a linguistic rephrasing task requiring declarative knowledge. In particular, statements in the form if p then q were rephrased into the form p only if q with greater frequency for permission than for arbitrary statements, and rephrasings of permission statements produced a pattern of introduction of modals (must, can) totally unlike that observed for arbitrary conditional statements. Other pragmatic schemas, such as “causal” and “evidence” schemas can account for both linguistic and reasoning phenomena that alternative hypotheses fail to explain.     

Development of movement schema in young children

To examine the development of movement schema in young school-age children, i.e., whether principles which govern fine eye-hand coordination skill learning as suggested by Schmidt's schema theory apply to the learning of gross motor skills Exp. 1 involved 48 right-handed first-grade children. On a modification of the Fitts Reciprocal Tapping task children moved a stylus (held in the hand or attached to a special shoe worn on the foot) between two metal targets separated by different distances. Children were randomly assigned to one of eight groups: two control or no-practice groups and six experimental or transfer groups. A one-way analysis of variance followed by appropriate Scheffé post hoc tests indicated that movements of the lower limbs were not organized into a movement schema, but a pattern of schema of movement for the upper limbs developed. That no movement schema developed for lower limb movements suggests development of movement schema is intricately linked to both the existing as well as the potential for developing precise movement in those limbs. Exp. 2 involved 40 first-grade children who were randomly assigned to perform a gross-motor agility task under one of three conditions: direct practice on the criterion task, constant practice on a modification of the criterion task, or variable practice on several different modifications of the criterion task. A groups X trials analysis of variance with appropriate post hoc tests indicated that there were no significant differences among direct, constant, or variable practice groups. Data suggest that the amount of practice may be as important as the type of practice in developing movement schema involved in gross motor skills in young children.     

How do Motor Systems Deal with the Problems of Controlling Three-Dimensional Rotations?

Rotations are fundamental to motor control, not only for orienting to stimuli but also in the joint articulations that underlie translational movements. Studying three-dimensional (3-D) rotations of the simplest joint system, the eye, has provided general insights into the neural control of movement. First, in selecting one 3-D eye orientation for each two-dimensional (2-D) gaze direction, the oculomotor system generates a behavior called Listing's law that constrains eye position to a 2-D plane, Listing's plane. This selection is made internally by an inverse kinematic transformation called the Listing's law operator. Second, the oculomotor system incorporates the inherent multiplicative relationship between rotational velocity and position to generate the 3-D movement and position commands required by Listing's law. Finally, the coordinate systems for these commands appear to align with Listing's plane rather than with anatomic structures. Recent investigations have revealed similar behavioral constraints in the orientations of the head and arm, suggesting that the neural mechanisms for Listing's law may have analogues in many motor systems.