Direct Learning in Auditory Perception: An Information-Space Analysis of Auditory Perceptual Learning of Object Length

The theory of direct learning characterizes perception of a given property as occupying a locus in an information space and characterizes perceptual learning as continuous movement in that information space toward a more optimal locus. Three experiments investigated whether such an information-based account of learning could be applied to perceptual learning in audition. The results of Experiment 1 showed that perception of length by audition could be characterized as occupying a locus in an information space consisting of inertial variables that constrain perception of length by dynamic or effortful touch. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that feedback about length led to predictable movements across the information space from less optimal to more optimal loci. Such results provide additional support for the theory of direct learning and suggest that convergence information may be modality independent.     

Movements or targets: What makes an action in action–effect learning?

According to ideomotor theory, actions become linked to the sensory feedback they contingently produce, so that anticipating the feedback automatically evokes the action it typically results from. Numerous recent studies have provided evidence in favour of such action–effect learning but left an important issue unresolved. It remains unspecified to what extent action–effect learning is based on associating effect-representations to representations of the performed movements or to representations of the targets at which the behaviour aimed at. Two experiments were designed to clarify this issue. In an acquisition phase, participants learned the contingency between key presses and effect tones. In a following test phase, key–effect and movement–effect relations were orthogonally assessed by changing the hand–key mapping for one half of the participants. Experiment 1 showed precedence for target–effect over movement–effect learning in a forced-choice RT task. In Experiment 2, target–effect learning was also shown to influence the outcome of response selection in a free-choice task. Altogether, the data indicate that both movement–effect and target–effect associations contribute to the formation of action–effect linkages—provided that movements and targets are likewise contingently related to the effects.     

Effects of intention and learning on attention to information in dynamic touch

The current research distinguishes two types of attention shifts: those entailed by perceptual learning and those entailed by changing intention. In perceptual learning, participants given feedback have been shown to gradually shift attention toward the optimal (i.e., specifying) information variable for the task. A shift in variable use is also expected when intention changes, because an intention to perceive some property entails attunement to information about that property. We compared the effects of feedback and intention in a dynamic (kinesthetic) touch task by representing both as changes of locus in an information space of inertial variables. Participants wielded variously sized, unseen, rectangular parallelepipeds and made length or width judgments about them. When given feedback, participants made gradual attentional shifts toward the optimal variable, which demonstrates the education of attention. When asked to report a new property, participants made large attentional jumps to the ballpark of the optimal variable for the new property. Exploratory movements were measured on 6 participants and were found to differ as a function of intention and to change with learning.     

On learning to move randomly

In 2 experiments, the authors examined whether and to what degree young adults can learn to produce random planar motion of the index finger or fingers. Three different types of information feedback were provided to the participants (N = 8 in each experiment) over up to 5 days of practice across the 2 experiments. The results from both experiments revealed that the participants produced a relatively low level of movement randomness in finger motion and that they did not learn through practice to enhance the stochastic properties of their movement under any feedback conditions. The findings provide further evidence that there are relatively tight constraints on the number of dimensions that are regulating single-limb planar motion and that those constraints are not susceptible to change through typical learning protocols.     

On Learning to Move Randomly

In 2 experiments, the authors examined whether and to what degree young adults can learn to produce random planar motion of the index finger or fingers. Three different types of information feedback were provided to the participants (N = 8 in each experiment) over up to 5 days of practice across the 2 experiments. The results from both experiments revealed that the participants produced a relatively low level of movement randomness in finger motion and that they did not learn through practice to enhance the stochastic properties of their movement under any feedback conditions. The findings provide further evidence that there are relatively tight constraints on the number of dimensions that are regulating single-limb planar motion and that those constraints are not susceptible to change through typical learning protocols.     

Information processes in movement learning: capacity and structural interference effects

A series of experiments examined motor learning as an information processing activity occurring within a working short-term memory system and where response-produced feedback and knowledge of results (KR) are used to modify the action plan developed from previous attempts at the movement task. Use of interpolated activities in the KR delay interval allowed inferences to be made regarding the capacity and structural characteristics of these information processes. Results indicated no capacity limitations on the learning process but important structural effects were found. The results supported the idea that response-produced feedback is relatively unimportant as a feedback variable early in learning. Rather, the use of KR at a relatively high level of movement planning appears to be the important information processing activity underlying learning. Finally, the results supported the view that these information processes are related to cognitive problem solving activities.     

Information Processes in Movement Learning

A series of experiments examined motor learning as an information processing activity occurring within a working short-term memory system and where response-produced feedback and knowledge of results (KR) are used to modify the action plan developed from previous attempts at the movement task. Use of interpolated activities in the KR delay interval allowed inferences to be made regarding the capacity and structural characteristics of these information processes. Results indicated no capacity limitations on the learning process but important structural effects were found. The results supported the idea that response-produced feedback is relatively unimportant as a feedback variable early in learning. Rather, the use of KR at a relatively high level of movement planning appears to be the important information processing activity underlying learning. Finally, the results supported the view that these information processes are related to cognitive problem solving activities.     

Why do the effects of delaying reinforcement in animals and delaying feedback in humans differ? A working-memory analysis

Animal research has shown that reinforcement is substantially less effective when it is delayed, but in studies of human motor learning delays in providing feedback typically have much less effect. One possible explanation is that in human research participants know the response to be learned and can thus focus on it during the delay; that is not the case in experiments on animals. We tested this hypothesis using a task in which participants had minimal information on what movement was correct and found that, as in animal experiments, participants learned only when feedback was immediate. A second experiment confirmed that the effects of the delay depended on how many responses had to be held in working memory: the greater the memory load, the poorer the learning. The results point to the importance of activity during a delay on learning; implications for the teaching of motor skills are discussed.     

Why do the effects of delaying reinforcement in animals and delaying feedback in humans differ? A working-memory analysis

Animal research has shown that reinforcement is substantially less effective when it is delayed, but in studies of human motor learning delays in providing feedback typically have much less effect. One possible explanation is that in human research participants know the response to be learned and can thus focus on it during the delay; that is not the case in experiments on animals. We tested this hypothesis using a task in which participants had minimal information on what movement was correct and found that, as in animal experiments, participants learned only when feedback was immediate. A second experiment confirmed that the effects of the delay depended on how many responses had to be held in working memory: the greater the memory load, the poorer the learning. The results point to the importance of activity during a delay on learning; implications for the teaching of motor skills are discussed.     

An additive factors analysis of the effect(s) of location cues associated with auditory stimuli on stages of information processing

The additive factors method (AFM) was used as a tool for assessing the locus (or loci) of the detrimental effect of auditory location cues in the chain of (visual) information processing. In the first experiment the location variable was factorially combined with response specificity, which is assumed to affect the response adjustment stage. A second experiment was performed in which movement amplitude, assumed to affect the response programming stage, was manipulated in addition to the location variable and a different variety of response specificity. Finally, the location variable was combined with relative S-R frequency, which is also assumed to affect the response programming stage, in a third experiment. The results of these experiments showed additive effects of the location variable with motor variables. The remaining two experiments were designed to assess the effects of location cues on response selection. In these experiments the location variable was combined with the number of response alternatives. Response speed decreased with an increase in the number of response alternatives. However, the effects of the location variable and number of response alternatives were additive. According to the additive factor logic, then, the results of experiments 1, 2 and 3 seem to indicate that the locus of interference of the location cues is not in the later response stages of the reaction process. The results of the last two experiments were interpreted to suggest that the effects of location cues and the number of response alternatives affect either different processes within the response selection stage or affect different process stages. It was concluded that the latter alternative explains most of the data currently available and that the stimulus identification stage is the most likely candidate for the locus of the location effect.     

PREVENTING BACK INJURIES IN HOSPITAL SETTINGS: THE EFFECTS OF VIDEO MODELING ON SAFE PATIENT LIFTING BY NURSES

This study evaluated video scoring and feedback about scoring as a safety intervention among 6 nursing staff. The dependent variable was safety behavior on one‐person transfers. Following baseline, 5 nursing staff participated in an information phase. A video scoring phase was then introduced for all 6. A feedback phase was added for 2 participants. All participants experienced treatment withdrawal. Information resulted in improvements for all 5 participants who received it. Further improvements were observed during video scoring for the 5 participants who improved following information. No improvements were observed for the participant who received only video scoring. Safety feedback further improved safety for the 2 participants who received it. However, participants' behavior returned to video scoring levels during withdrawal.     

Questioning implicit motor learning as instantiated by the pursuit-tracking task

The effect of concurrent visual feedback on the implicit learning of repeated segments in a task of pursuit tracking has been tested. Although this feedback makes it possible to regulate the positional error during the movement, it could also induce negative guidance effects. To test this hypothesis, a first set of participants (N=42) were assigned to two groups, which performed either the standard pursuit-tracking task based on the experimental paradigm of Pew ( 1974 ; group F-ST), or a task called "movement reproduction" in which the feedback was suppressed (group noF-ST). A second set of participants (N=26) performed in the same feedback condition groups but in a dual-task situation (F-DT and noF-DT; Experiment 2). The results appear to confirm our predictions since the participants in groups without feedback, contrary to those in groups with feedback, succeeded with practice in differentiating their performances as a function of the nature of the segments (repeated or nonrepeated) both in simple (Experiment 1) and in dual-task (Experiment 2) situations. These experiments indicate that the feedback in the pursuit-tracking task induces a guidance function potentially resulting in an easiness tracking that prevents the participants from learning the repetition.     

Consistent and Variable Practice Conditions: Effects on Relative and Absolute Timing

The authors conducted the present experiments to resolve the discrepancy between studies in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced by consistent practice conditions and contextual interference experiments in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced more by random practice than by blocked practice. There were 40 participants in Experiment 1 and 48 in Experiment 2. The results of Experiment 1 extended previous findings: The learning of the relative-timing pattern was systematically enhanced by the degree to which the practice conditions promoted movement consistency (constant > blocked > serial > random). Experiment 2 provided evidence that the discrepancy between the relative-timing effects in the 2 groups of studies was a product of the way in which relative-timing goals and feedback were presented. When the feedback was presented as segment times, random practice resulted in generally more stable relative-timing patterns during acquisition than blocked practice did. Thus, in both experiments, the learning of the relative-timing pattern was enhanced by more stable relative-timing conditions during acquisition. Absolute-timing learning, as indexed by the transfer tests, was enhanced by serial or random practice as compared with constant or blocked practice, and was relatively unaffected by feedback conditions directed at the relative-timing pattern. In terms of motor programming theory, those findings are taken as additional evidence for the disassociation of memories supporting generalized motor program (GMP) performance, as indexed by relative timing, and parameter performance, as indexed by absolute timing.     

Consistent and variable practice conditions: effects on relative and absolute timing

The authors conducted the present experiments to resolve the discrepancy between studies in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced by consistent practice conditions and contextual interference experiments in which relative-timing learning has been found to be enhanced more by random practice than by blocked practice. There were 40 participants in Experiment 1 and 48 in Experiment 2. The results of Experiment 1 extended previous findings: The learning of the relative-timing pattern was systematically enhanced by the degree to which the practice conditions promoted movement consistency (constant > blocked > serial > random). Experiment 2 provided evidence that the discrepancy between the relative-timing effects in the 2 groups of studies was a product of the way in which relative-timing goals and feedback were presented. When the feedback was presented as segment times, random practice resulted in generally more stable relative-timing patterns during acquisition than blocked practice did. Thus, in both experiments, the learning of the relative-timing pattern was enhanced by more stable relative-timing conditions during acquisition. Absolute-timing learning, as indexed by the transfer tests, was enhanced by serial or random practice as compared with constant or blocked practice, and was relatively unaffected by feedback conditions directed at the relative-timing pattern. In terms of motor programming theory, those findings are taken as additional evidence for the disassociation of memories supporting generalized motor program (GMP) performance, as indexed by relative timing, and parameter performance, as indexed by absolute timing.     

Average KR schedule in learning of timing: influence of length for summary knowledge of results and task complexity

This experiment investigated the influence of length for average Knowledge of Results (KR) and task complexity on learning of timing in a barrier knock-down task. Participants (30 men and 30 women) attempted to press a goal button in 1200 msec. after pressing a start button. The participant was assigned into one of six groups by two tasks (simple and complex) and three feedback groups (100% KR, Average 3, Average 5). The simple and complex tasks required a participant to knock down one or three barriers before pressing a goal button. After a pretest without KR, participants practiced 60 trials of physical practice with one of the three following groups as a practice phase: one given the result of movement time after every trial (100% KR), a second given the average movement time after every third trial (Average 3), a third given the average movement time after every fifth trial (Average 5). Participants then performed a posttest with no-KR and two retention tests, taken 10 min. and 24 hr. after the posttest without KR. Analysis gave several findings. (1) On the complex task, the absolute constant error (/CE/) and the variable error (VE) were less than those on the simple task. (2) The /CE/ and the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 groups were less than those of the Average 5 group in the practice phase, and the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 group were less than those of the Average 5 group on the retention tests. (3) In the practice phase, the /CE/ and the VE on Blocks 1 and 2 were higher than on Blocks 5 and 6. (4) On the retention tests, the /CE/ of the posttest was less than retention tests 1 and 2. And, the VE of the 100% KR and the Average 3 groups were less than that of the Average 5 group. These results suggest that the average feedback length of three trials and the given feedback information after every trial are advantageous to learning timing on this barrier knock-down task.     

不同学习方式下归类不确定时的特征推理

采用学习-迁移模式, 探讨了同时学习和继时学习两种方式下归类不确定时的特征推理。共包括2个实验, 其中实验1探讨了固定学习轮次的情况, 实验2探讨了固定学习正确率的情况。实验结果表明：同时呈现类别要素的同时学习方式下, 被试习得序列式的单类别表征(原型表征), 在归类不确定时的特征推理中按照“单类的Bayesian规则”进行特征推理, 即P(j\F) =P(k\F)·P(j\k); 相继呈现类别要素的继时学习方式下, 被试习得并列式的多类别表征, 在归类不确定时的特征推理中按照“理性模型”进行推理, 即 P(j\F) =Σk P(k\F)·P(j\k)。     

反馈类型和反馈时间对动作技能获得的影响

基于简单直线运动任务和复杂曲线追踪任务,在运动技能获得阶段考察不同反馈类型和反馈时间对操作绩效的影响。结果发现,在复杂曲线轨迹追踪任务中,接受运动轨迹反馈的被试组比接受偏差数值反馈组的成绩更好;即时反馈和延迟反馈组的操作绩效间没有显著差异。在简单直线运动任务中,提供落点偏差的图形反馈组成绩始终优于提供“近/远”信息的文本反馈组;在练习初期,即时反馈组成绩更好。说明,反馈信息的具体-抽象程度影响被试运动技能获得,提供具体直观的轨迹/图形反馈利于运动技能获得;反馈时间对运动技能的影响因任务难度而异。     

Practice variability promotes an external focus of attention and enhances motor skill learning

Variability in practice has been shown to enhance motor skill learning. Benefits of practice variability have been attributed to motor schema formation (variable versus constant practice), or more effortful information processing (random versus blocked practice). We hypothesized that, among other mechanisms, greater practice variability might promote an external focus of attention on the intended movement effect, while less variability would be more conducive to a less effective internal focus on body movements. In Experiment 1, the learning of a throwing task was enhanced by variable versus constant practice, and variable group participants reported focusing more on the distance to the target (external focus), while constant group participants focused more on their posture (internal focus). In Experiment 2, golf putting was learned more effectively with a random compared with a blocked practice schedule. Furthermore, random group learners reported using a more effective distal external focus (i.e., distance to the target) to a greater extent, whereas blocked group participants used a less effective proximal focus (i.e., putter) more often. While attentional focus was assessed through questionnaires in the first two experiments, learners in Experiment 3 were asked to report their current attentional focus at any time during practice. Again, the learning of a throwing task was more effective after random relative to blocked practice. Also, random practice learners reported using more external focus cues, while in blocked practice participants used more internal focus cues. The findings suggest that the attentional foci induced by different practice schedules might be at least partially responsible for the learning differences.     

Kinematic information feedback for learning a rapid arm movement

The experiments reported examine the notion that knowledge of results (KR) about the outcome of a response does not provide the necessary information for optimizing performance in many skilled activities. The effect of traditional KR was contrasted with various kinematic feedback parameters in the acquisition of a single degree of freedom response requiring the minimization of movement time. Experiment 1 showed that the presentation of discrete kinematic information feedback (peak accelaration, time to peak accelaration, and velocity at the target location) did not facilitate performance over movement-time KR. Experiment 2 revealed that presentation of a computer generated velocity-time representation of the movement as terminal information feedback improved performance over movement-time KR. This facilitation occured even without knowledge of the kinematics for optimal performance. The findings suggest that the task criterion specifies the appropriate information feedback for skill learning in that the information feedback must match the constraints imposed upon response output.     

Action information from classification learning

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois Much of our learning comes from interacting with objects. Two experiments investigated whether or not arbitrary actions used during category learning with objects might be incorporated into object representations and influence later recognition judgments. In a virtual-reality chamber, participants used distinct arm movements to make different classification responses. During a recognition test phase, these same objects required arm movements that were consistent or inconsistent with the classification movement. In both experiments, consistent movements were facilitated relative to inconsistent movements, suggesting that arbitrary action information is incorporated into the representations.