Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Practicing a Structured Continuous Key-Pressing Task: Motor Chunking or Rhythm Consolidation?

W. B. Verwey1, Y. Dronkert

  • 1TNO Human Factors Research Institute, P.O. Box 23, NL 3769 ZG, Soesterberg, The Netherlands. verwey@tm.tno.nl

Journal of Motor Behavior
|March 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary

Extensive practice helps develop motor chunks for key-pressing tasks. These chunks, formed in structured conditions, are also used in unstructured sequences, suggesting concurrent preparation influences performance.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A Forthcoming Key Press Can Be Selected While Earlier Ones Are Executed.

Journal of motor behavior·1995
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Motor Control
  • Human Factors

Background:

  • Motor learning involves acquiring complex sequences of movements.
  • Understanding how practice influences the organization of sequential motor tasks is crucial.
  • Previous research suggests chunking and rhythm-based control may explain motor sequence learning.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the effects of extensive practice on sequential key-pressing tasks.
  • To determine if motor chunks developed in structured conditions transfer to unstructured conditions.
  • To evaluate the role of rhythm-based control versus concurrent preparation in motor sequence execution.

Main Methods:

  • Thirty-six subjects practiced a nine-key sequential key-pressing task.
  • Structured conditions introduced response-stimulus intervals (RSIs) to partition sequences.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Unstructured conditions had zero RSIs, allowing for analysis of transfer and preparation effects.

    • Main Results:

    • Motor chunks developed in structured conditions were utilized in unstructured conditions.
    • Rhythm-based control was rejected as an explanation due to interval ratios and predictive failures.
    • Unstructured within-group intervals were slower than structured ones, with a more pronounced effect in longer sequences (333 group).
    • Shorter groups were more affected by concurrent preparation than longer groups.

    Conclusions:

    • Motor chunking, not rhythm-based control, appears to underlie the observed transfer effects.
    • Concurrent preparation of a forthcoming response group interferes with the execution of the preceding group.
    • Sequence length influences the degree of interference from concurrent preparation, with shorter groups being more susceptible.