Are all changes equal? Comparing early and late changes in sequence learning

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 144, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 180-189

  Ganor Stern, Dana ^a   Plonsker, Reut ^b   Perlman, Amotz ^c   Tzelgov, Joseph ^b  

^a ACHVA ACADEMIC COLLEGE   (Israel)

^b BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^c BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Action sequences; Chunking; Sequence learning

Indexed keywords

2330; 2340; ACTION SEQUENCES; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHUNKING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; SEQUENCE LEARNING; TASK PERFORMANCE; TIME;

2330; 2340; ACTION SEQUENCES; CHUNKING; SEQUENCE LEARNING;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84880338373     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bo J., Seidler R.D. Visuospatial working memory capacity predicts the organization of acquired explicit motor sequences. Journal of Neurophysiology 2009, 101:3116-3125.
2. Cowan N. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2001, 24:87-185.
3. Crump M.J.C., Logan G.D. Hierarchical control and skilled typing: Evidence for word-level control over the execution of individual keystrokes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2010, 36(6):1369-1380.
4. Garcia-Colera A., Semjen A. The organization of rapid movement sequences as a function of sequence length. Acta Psychologica 1987, 66(3):237-250.
5. Hazeltine E., Grafton S.T., Ivry R. Attention and stimulus characteristics determine the locus of motor-sequence encoding: A PET study. Brain 1997, 120:123-140.
6. Hikosaka O., Nakahara H., Rand M.K., Sakai K., Lu X., Nakamura K., et al. Parallel neural networks for learning sequential procedures. Trends in Neurosciences 1999, 22(10):465-471.
7. Jiménez L. Taking patterns for chunks: Is there any evidence of chunk learning in continuous serial reaction-time tasks?. Psychological Research 2008, 72(4):387-396.
8. Jiménez L., Vazquez G.A. Implicit sequence learning and contextual cueing do not compete for central cognitive resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 2011, 37(1):222-235.
9. Kessler Y., Meiran M. Two dissociable updating processes in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34(6):1339-1348.
10. Klapp S. Motor response programming during simple and choice reaction time: The role of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21(5):1015-1027.
11. Koch I., Hoffmann J. Patterns, chunks, and hierarchies in serial reaction-time tasks. Psychological Research 2000, 63:22-35.
12. Logan G., Crump M.J.C. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. The disruptive effects of attention to the hands in skilled typewriting. Psychological Science 2009, 20(10):1296-1300.
13. MacKay D.G. The problems of flexibility, fluency, and speed-accuracy trade-off in skilled behavior. Psychological Review 1982, 89(5):483-506.
14. Miller G.A., Galanter E., Pribram K.H. Plans and the structure of behavior 1960, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York: Holt.
15. Norman D., Shallice T. Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research 1986, Vol. 4:1-18. Plenum, New York.
16. Park J.H., Shea C.H. Sequence learning: Response structure and effector transfer. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2005, 58(3):387-419.
17. Perlman A., Pothos E.M., Edwards D., Tzelgov J. Task-relevant chunking in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2010, 36:649-661.
18. Perlman A., Tzelgov J. Automatic mode of acquisition of spatial sequences in a serial reaction time paradigm. Psychological Research 2009, 73:98-106.
19. Perruchet P., Vinter A., Pacteau C., Gallego J. The formation of structurally relevant units in artificial grammar learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2002, 55(2):485-503.
20. Piek J.P., Glencross D.J., Barrett N.C., Love G.L. The effect of temporal and force changes on the patterning of sequential movements. Psychological Research 1993, 55(2):116-123.
21. Rhodes B.J., Bullock D., Verwey W.B., Averbeck B.B., Page M.P.A. Learning and production of movement sequences: Behavioral, neurophysiological, and modeling perspectives. Human Movement Science 2004, 23(5):699-746.
22. Rosenbaum D.A. Human motor control 2010, Elsevier, Burlingtom, MA. 2nd ed.
23. Sakai K., Kitaguchi K., Hikosaka O. Chunking during human visuomotor sequence learning. Experimental Brain Research 2003, 152(2):229-242.
24. Schneider W., Eschman A., Zuccolotto A. E-Prime user's guide 2002, Psychology Software Tools, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.
25. Seidler R.D., Bo J., Anguera J.A. Neurocognitive contributions to motor skill learning: The role of working memory. Journal of Motor Behavior 2012, 44(6):445-453.
26. Siegler R.S. Microgenetic analyses of learning. Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language 2006, Vol. 2:464-510. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. K. D., R.S. Siegler (Eds.).
27. Tubau E., Hommel B., López-Moliner J. Modes of executive control in sequence learning: From stimulus-based to plan-based control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 2007, 136(1):43-63.
28. Tzelgov J. Specifying the relations between automaticity and consciousness: A theoretical note. Consciousness and Cognition 1997, 6:441-451.
29. Verwey W.B. Buffer loading and chunking in sequential key pressing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1996, 22:544-562.
30. Verwey W.B. Evidence for a multistage model of practice in a sequential movement task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes 1999, 25(6):1693-1708.
31. Verwey W.B. Concatenating familiar movement sequences: The versatile cognitive processor. Acta Psychologica 2001, 106(1-2):69-95.
32. Verwey W.B. Processing modes and parallel processors in producing familiar keying sequences. Psychological Research 2003, 67(2):106-122.
33. Verwey W.B. Diminished motor skill development in elderly: Indications for limited motor chunk use. Acta Psychologica 2010, 134(2):206-214.
34. Verwey W.B., Abrahamse E.L. Distinct modes of executing movement sequences: Reacting, associating, and chunking. Acta Psychologica 2012, 140(3):274-282.
35. Verwey W.B., Abrahamse E.L., De Kleine E. Cognitive processing in new and practiced discrete keying sequences. Frontiers in Psychology 2010, 1(32):1-13.
36. Verwey W.B., Abrahamse E.L., De Kleine E., Ruitenberg M.F.L. Evidence for graded central processing capacity in a sequential movement task. Psychological Research 2013, (in press).
37. Verwey W.B., Abrahamse E.L., Ruitenberg M.F.L., Jiménez L., De Kleine E. Motor skill learning in the middle-aged: Limited development of motor chunks and explicit sequence knowledge. Psychological Research 2011, 75(5):406-422.
38. Vogel E.K., Machizawa M.G. Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Nature 2004, 428:748-750.
39. Wilkinson L., Shanks D.R. Intentional control and implicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2004, 30(2):354-369.