Dyad training protocols and the development of a motor sequence representation.

The purpose of the experiment was to determine the extent to which observation and the inter-trial dialogue in a dyad training protocol enhance the development of a movement sequence representation. The task was to reproduce a 1300ms spatial-temporal pattern of elbow extension/flexion movements. An inter-manual transfer design with a retention test and two effector transfer tests was used. The mirror transfer test required the same motor pattern of homologous muscle activation and a sequence of joint angles as experienced during the acquisition phase, and the non-mirror transfer test required the same visual-spatial pattern as practiced during acquisition. Participants (N=40) were randomly assigned to one of four groups (50 practice acquisition trials): a dyad training group where two participants alternated between physical and observational practice and permitting an inter-trial dialogue, a dyad training group where two participants alternated between physical practice and permitting a dialogue without observation, a dyad training group where two participants alternated between physical and observational practice without a dialogue, and an individual practice control group where one participant learned the movement sequence. The practice duration was for all participants identical. The results indicated that participants involved in the dyad training protocols with either observation and/or the inter-trial dialogue developed a motor representation of the movement sequence.

The influence of eye-movements on the development of a movement sequence representation during observational and physical practice.

An experiment was conducted to examine the development of a movement sequence representation and the role of eye-movements during observational and physical practice. The task was to reproduce a 1300ms spatial-temporal pattern of a sequence of elbow flexions and extensions. An inter-manual transfer design with a retention and two effector transfer tests (contralateral limb) was used. The mirror transfer test required the same pattern of homologous muscle activation and a sequence of joint angles as experienced during the acquisition phase, and the non-mirror transfer test required the same visual-spatial pattern as performed or observed during acquisition. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups differing in eye-movements (free to use their eyes vs. instruction to fixate) and the practice type (observational practice vs. physical practice). The results indicated that permitting to use eye-movements facilitates sequence learning. This advantage was found on both practice types. The results of the transfer tests indicated that participants of the physical practice group who were permitted to use their eyes demonstrated superior transfer performance in the mirror transfer test, while participants in the observational practice group demonstrated better performance on the non-mirror transfer test. These findings indicated that eye-movements enhanced the development of a visual-spatial representation during observational practice as well as a motor representation during physical practice.

Magnifying visual target information and the role of eye movements in motor sequence learning.

An experiment investigated the influence of eye movements on learning a simple motor sequence task when the visual display was magnified. The task was to reproduce a 1300 ms spatial-temporal pattern of elbow flexions and extensions. The spatial-temporal pattern was displayed in front of the participants. Participants were randomly assigned to four groups differing on eye movements (free to use their eyes/instructed to fixate) and the visual display (small/magnified). All participants had to perform a pre-test, an acquisition phase, a delayed retention test, and a transfer test. The results indicated that participants in each practice condition increased their performance during acquisition. The participants who were permitted to use their eyes in the magnified visual display outperformed those who were instructed to fixate on the magnified visual display. When a small visual display was used, the instruction to fixate induced no performance decrements compared to participants who were permitted to use their eyes during acquisition. The findings demonstrated that a spatial-temporal pattern can be learned without eye movements, but being permitting to use eye movements facilitates the response production when the visual angle is increased.

The role of eye movements in motor sequence learning.

An experiment that utilized a 16-element movement sequence was designed to determine the impact of eye movements on sequence learning. The participants were randomly assigned to two experimental groups: a group that was permitted to use eye movements (FREE) and a second group (FIX) that was instructed to fixate on a marker during acquisition (ACQ). A retention test (RET) was designed to provide a measure of learning, and two transfer tests were designed to determine the extent to which eye movements influenced sequence learning. The results demonstrated that both groups decreased the response time to produce the sequence, but the participants in the FREE group performed the sequence more quickly than participants of the FIX group during the ACQ, RET and the two transfer tests. Furthermore, continuous visual control of response execution was reduced over the course of learning. The results of the transfer tests indicated that oculomotor information regarding the sequence can be stored in memory and enhances response production.