| Abstract: | It has been suggested that increasing proprioceptive feedback and ensuring its consistency from trial to trial favours timing accuracy. The progressive acquisition of a timing performance with isometric and anisometric responses was investigated in conditions of 'inconsistent feedback', with two different methods: counting seconds or not. Subjects gripped the handle of a dynamometer during precisely 5 seconds in 4 randomly distributed conditions: 'Weak' or 'Strong' constant force, 'Slow' or 'Rapid' variable force. A first group produced the durations without counting and a second group counted seconds either mentally or aloud. Learning was examined in 4 successive blocks of trials. Average produced durations did not differ as a function of group, but the variability was reduced when subjects counted seconds. In both groups, the constant force conditions induced more accurate responses than the variable force conditions in the first block of trials. 'Slow' and 'Rapid' conditions were respectively associated with overestimation and under-estimation of response duration. These trends diminished progressively with learning. Both groups yielded sequential effects linked to duration and independent of condition. These data suggest that, whether subjects counted or not, learning was not based on condition-specific proprioceptive feedback. It may involve the elaboration of an internal temporal reference common to all conditions. |
