Implicit response-effect learning was examined in 2 experiments, using a visual search version of the serial reaction time task introduced by M. J. Nissen and P. Bullemer (1987). In Experiment 1, the relation between the response to the current stimulus and the location of the stimulus on the next trial (i.e., effect) was varied systematically. In Experiment 2, both the frequency of the association between stimuli and responses and the frequency of the association between responses and effects were manipulated. Only the frequency of the response-effect relation influenced learning. These results indicate that response-effect learning is an important component of serial learning. It is argued that response-effect relations constitute the initial implicit component of learning in serial reaction time tasks. From this implicit knowledge, knowledge about the stimulus sequence as well as the response sequence develops later.This research was supported by Grant WIP 014665/W from the German government (program for the integration of scientists from the former East-German Academy of Sciences into German universities). I thank Henry Schroder, Diana Mehnert, and Dorle Henning for their assistance in performing the experiments, Joachim Hoffmann, and especially Peter Frensch for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Moreover, Peter Frensch helped me very much in improving the English writing.

Four experiments provide converging evidence that serial learning in a serial reaction task is based on response-effect learning, mediated by the learning of the relations between a response and the stimulus that follows it. In Experiment 1, the authors varied the stimulus sequence and the response-stimulus relations while holding the response sequence constant. Learning effects depended on the complexity of the response-stimulus relations but not on the stimulus-stimulus relations. In Experiment 2, transfer of serial learning from 1 stimulus sequence to another was only found when both sequences had identical response-stimulus relations. In Experiment 3, a variation of the stimulus sequence alone had no effect on serial learning, whereas in Experiment 4 learning effects increased when the response-stimulus relations but not the stimulus-stimulus relations were simplified. These findings suggest that serial learning is based on mechanisms of voluntary action control.

The anticipative learning model for acquiring action-effect relations states that the acquisition of action-effect relations depends on processes that are part of action planning, in particular the anticipation of possible effects. Experiment 1 shows that response planning is indeed crucial for the learning of response effects. In this experiment distractors (tones) were presented either during response preparation or in the time interval between response execution and the presentation of a response effect. Response-effect learning was impaired when the distractors were presented during response preparation. The finding is consistent with the assumption that the distractors impaired the anticipation of potential effects and therefore reduced effect learning. In Experiment 2 all responses had two effects. Participants were instructed to produce one of the effects. Under this condition, response-effect learning was only found for the instructed effect, not for the non-instructed effect. The two experiments thus support the view that response-effect learning is selective and depends on the anticipation of potential effects during response planning. The results are discussed in terms of a model that explains both the learning of response-effect relations and the use of these effects for action control within the same theoretical framework.

Subjects are able to learn even very complex serial patterns in serial-reaction-time tasks. The investigation of the learning processes behind this phenomenon has yielded contradictory results. Some studies have come to the conclusion the subjects had learned the sequence of stimuli. Other studies have assumed that the sequence of responses had been learned or a combination of both stimuli and responses. The present experiments stress the impact of motor responses on serial-pattern learning. The subjects had to respond to serial targets that were presented within a matrix of distractors. The position of each target could be predicted from the identity and position of the previous target. If the subjects were to learn this pattern, they would be able to speed up the search for the target and give faster responses. The results indicated that the relation between the target identity and the position of the next target was acquired much better by those subjects who had to respond to each target with a special motor response. If the same response was required for the relevant targets, knowledge of the rule was somewhat fragmentary. To explain these results, mechanisms of motor learning and motor planning are discussed. It is assumed that learning of the rules occurs if the position changes appear to be effects of different motor responses.

The last decade has seen a proliferation of empirical studies that seek to understand how the cognitive system links voluntary motor actions with their perceptual effects. A view that has found considerable support in this research is the ideo-motor approach to action control which holds that actors select, initiate, and execute a movement by activating anticipatory codes of the movement's sensory effects We, first review the empirical evidence from different paradigms showing that effects of voluntary actions become anticipated during response production. In a second step we survey empirical data investigating the nature of the mechanisms that link voluntary motor actions with their intended and expected perceptual effects. We argue that the integration, or binding, of perceptual and motor codes occurs in action planning where features of intended effects are selectively bound to features of the actions that are selected to achieve these effects in the environment. As a final step we will summarize empirical findings that may elucidate the particular roles of effect-code activation in response production and control. AbstractThe last decade has seen a proliferation of empirical studies that seek to understand how the cognitive system links voluntary motor actions with their perceptual effects. A view that has found considerable support in this research is the ideo-motor approach to action control which holds that actors select, initiate, and execute a movement by activating anticipatory codes of the movement"s sensory effects We, first review the empirical evidence from different paradigms showing that effects of voluntary actions become anticipated during response production. In a second step we survey empirical data investigating the nature of the mechanisms that link voluntary motor actions with their intended and expected perceptual effects. We argue that the integration, or binding, of perceptual and motor codes occurs in action planning where features of intended effects are selectively bound to features of the actions that are selected to achieve these effects in the environment. As a final step we will summarize empirical findings that may elucidate the particular roles of effect-code activation in response production and control.3