Transfer in Motor Sequence Learning: Effects of Practice Schedule and Sequence Context

Abstract

Transfer (i.e., the application of a learned skill in a novel context) is an important and desirable outcome of motor skill learning. While much research has been devoted to understanding transfer of explicit skills the mechanisms of skill transfer after incidental learning remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to (1) examine the effect of practice schedule on transfer and (2) investigate whether sequence-specific knowledge can transfer to an unfamiliar sequence context. We trained two groups of participants on an implicit serial response time task under a Constant (one sequence for 10 blocks) or Variable (alternating between two sequences for a total of 10 blocks) practice schedule. We evaluated response times for three types of transfer: task-general transfer to a structurally non-overlapping sequence, inter-manual transfer to a perceptually identical sequence, and sequence-specific transfer to a partially overlapping (three shared triplets) sequence. Results showed partial skill transfer to all three sequences and an advantage of Variable practice only for task-general transfer. Further, we found expression of sequence-specific knowledge for familiar sub-sequences in the overlapping sequence. These findings suggest that (1) constant practice may create interference for task-general transfer and (2) sequence-specific knowledge can transfer to a new sequential context.

Offline Optimization of the Relative Timing of Movements in a Sequence Is Blocked by Retroactive Behavioral Interference

“…Thus, the representation of the trained task after interference training was qualitatively, not only quantitatively different as compared to the no-interference condition. Non-specific transfer of task-general parameters was also observed, all transfer tests were significantly different from baseline performance of the untrained sequence (as previously observed in Korman et al, 2003), reflecting improvements in task components that are not dependent on knowledge of the sequential structure, such as improvements in stimulus–response mapping, or motor command generation (Müssgens and Ullén, 2015). Indeed, changes in kinematic parameters (e.g., amplitude and peak velocity) showed similar changes between the groups, regardless of the interference experience.…”

“…Susceptibility to transfer is thus an important aspect of motor learning (Müssgens and Ullén, 2015) and can be divided into sequence-specific, attributed to knowledge of the sequential order of the task elements (Park and Shea, 2005; Verwey and Clegg, 2005) and sequence non-specific components. How the processes of acquisition and transfer of a learned skill are interrelated is an important issue that needs to be investigated to enable development of training protocols whereby training can predict generalization of the acquired knowledge (Speelman and Kirsner, 2001).…”

“…How the processes of acquisition and transfer of a learned skill are interrelated is an important issue that needs to be investigated to enable development of training protocols whereby training can predict generalization of the acquired knowledge (Speelman and Kirsner, 2001). Training schedule, explicit vs. implicit nature of knowledge, broad vs. narrow transfer demands may critically affect the ability to generalize the sequential skill (Müssgens and Ullén, 2015). In particular, transfer between hands, in terms of number of correct sequences performed, is likely to be positive for sequence-specific as opposed to non-specific conditions (Grafton et al, 2002; Korman et al, 2003).…”

Training proprioception with sound: effects of real‐time auditory feedback on intermodal learning

“…19 This inclusion of variability could have also played an important role in maintaining proprioceptive performance during retention and G-tests. 24,47,48 Several reasons can be asserted for this enhancement in motor performance based on the theory of contextual interference. According to Battig, 22 a variable training paradigm could have allowed a learner to encode different strategies such as using multiple routes to acquire a new skill.…”

“…21,22 Therefore, promoting a persistent, robust representation of the skill set in the memory systems, which could then be retained and/or transferred to another skill set. 23,24 Second, the short training duration (5-7 min) with auditory feedback by Ghai et al 19 could also have served as an important factor in the lack of retainable effects. 25 Previous research analyzing the effects of auditory feedback on motor performance with shorter training durations such as Dyer et al 26 has also demonstrated performance decrements during a 24-h retention (RET 24 h) measurements.…”