Training for transfer of a movement timing skill

Previous findings by Langley and Zelaznik (1984) suggested two hypotheses why segmental (phasing) timing training produced a more superior transfer than nonsegmental (duration) timing training. One view (the higher order variable hypothesis) suggested that segmental training developed a timing skill that was flexible for various types of transfer tasks. Another view (the contextual interference hypothesis) was that the difficulty associated with segmental training was sufficient to provide this flexibility for later transfer. The present study contrasted these hypotheses by comparing transfer following phasing or duration training but which was low in contextual interference. The acquisition results favor a contextual interference explanation. The transfer results, however, are clearly a function of the development of a higher order timing skill. These findings are discussed in terms of the development of a timing skill that is best suited for flexibility of transfer.