Individual differences in motor skill learning: Past, present and future

Humans vary considerably in their ability to perform and learn new motor skills. In addition, they respond to different performance and practice conditions in varying ways. Historically, experimental psychologists have characterized these differences as 'experimental noise', yet for those who embrace differential psychology, the study of individual differences promises to deepen insights into the processes that mediate motor control and learning. In this paper, we highlight what we know about predicting motor learning based on individual difference characteristics and renew a call made by Lee Cronbach several decades ago to combine the methodologies used by experimental and differential psychologists to further our understanding of how to promote motor learning. The paper provides a brief historical overview of research on individual differences and motor learning followed by a systematic review of the last 20 years of research on this issue. The paper ends by highlighting some of the methodological challenges associated with conducting research on individual differences, as well as providing suggestions for future research. The study of individual differences has important implications for furthering our understanding of motor learning and when tailoring interventions for diverse learners at different stages of practice.

A Phonomotor Approach to Apraxia of Speech Treatment

Purpose This study continued Phase I investigation of a modified Phonomotor Treatment (PMT) Program on motor planning in two individuals with apraxia of speech (AOS) and aphasia and, with support from prior work, refined Phase I methodology for treatment intensity and duration, a measure of communicative participation, and the use of effect size benchmarks specific to AOS. Method A single-case experimental design with multiple baselines across behaviors and participants was used to examine acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of treatment effects 8-10 weeks posttreatment. Treatment was distributed 3 days a week, and duration of treatment was specific to each participant (criterion based). Experimental stimuli consisted of target sounds or clusters embedded nonwords and real words, specific to each participants' deficit. Results Findings show improved repetition accuracy for targets in trained nonwords, generalization to targets in untrained nonwords and real words, and maintenance of treatment effects at 10 weeks posttreatment for one participant and more variable outcomes for the other participant. Conclusions Results indicate that a modified version of PMT can promote generalization and maintenance of treatment gains for trained speech targets via a multimodal approach emphasizing repeated exposure and practice. While these results are promising, the frequent co-occurrence of AOS and aphasia warrants a treatment that addresses both motor planning and linguistic deficits. Thus, the application of traditional PMT with participant-specific modifications for AOS embedded into the treatment program may be a more effective approach. Future work will continue to examine and maximize improvements in motor planning, while also treating anomia in aphasia.

The Transfer Paradox: Effects of Contextual Interference on Retention and Transfer Performance of a Complex Cognitive Skill

In an exploratory study, the effects of contextual interference on retention and transfer performance were studied for learning a complex cognitive skill, namely, troubleshooting a computer-based simulation of a chemical process plant. Support was found for the “transfer paradox”: high contextual interference had negative effects on performance during practice and none on number of retention problems solved after the training but positive effects on number of new problems solved (transfer). Implications for the design of training are discussed.

CONTEXTUAL INTERFERENCE AND INTROVERSION/EXTRAVERSION IN MOTOR LEARNING

The Introversion/Extraversion dimension may interact with contextual interference, as random and blocked practice schedules imply distinct levels of variation. This study investigated the effect of different practice schedules in the acquisition of a motor skill in extraverts and introverts. Forty male undergraduate students (M = 24.3 yr., SD = 5.6) were classified as extraverts (n = 20) and introverts (n = 20) by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and allocated in one of two practice schedules with different levels of contextual interference: blocked (low contextual interference) and random (high contextual interference). Half of each group was assigned to a blocked practice schedule, and the other half was assigned to a random practice schedule. The design had two phases: acquisition and transfer (5 min. and 24 hr.). The participants learned variations of a sequential timing keypressing task. Each variation required the same sequence but different timing; three variations were used in acquisition, and one variation of intermediate length was used in transfer. Results for absolute error and overall timing error (root mean square error) indicated that the contextual interference effect was more pronounced for introverts. In addition, introverts who practiced according to the blocked schedule committed more errors during the 24-hr. transfer, suggesting that introverts did not appear to be challenged by a low contextual interference practice schedule.

Random and blocked practice of movement sequences: differential effects on response structure and movement speed

Three similar six-element key press sequences were practiced under blocked or random practice schedules with acquisition conducted on one day and retention and transfer on the next day. The task required participants to type, as quickly as possible, one of three 6-element sequences as observed on a computer monitor. In blocked practice, participants completed all practice in one repeated sequence before the next repeated sequence was introduced. In random acquisition practice, the three repeated sequences were randomly presented to the participants. The data suggest that random practice results in participants adopting a uniform response structure, while blocked practice allows participants to exploit unique sequential aspects of the individual tasks. This finding suggests that random practice may not be as effective as blocked practice when one of the tasks being practiced together can be optimized through the development of a unique response structure.

Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning

We review research related to the learning of complex motor skills with respect to principles developed on the basis of simple skill learning. Although some factors seem to have opposite effects on the learning of simple and of complex skills, other factors appear to be relevant mainly for the learning of more complex skills. We interpret these apparently contradictory findings as suggesting that situations with low processing demands benefit from practice conditions that increase the load and challenge the performer, whereas practice conditions that result in extremely high load should benefit from conditions that reduce the load to more manageable levels. The findings reviewed here call into question the generalizability of results from studies using simple laboratory tasks to the learning of complex motor skills. They also demonstrate the need to use more complex skills in motor-learning research in order to gain further insights into the learning process.

An assessment of the attention demands during random- and blocked-practice schedules

The reported study used the dual-task methodology to assess the attention demands associated with high and low contextual interference (CI) practice environments. Two specific issues were addressed. First, is there a difference in the attention demands during random and blocked schedules of practice? Second, what is the time course of any differential attention demands that emerge during random and blocked training? In order to address these questions two specific temporal loci were probed during practice: a pre-response interval and the inter-trial interval. It was assumed that the pre-response interval contained the reconstructive activity that is central to the reconstruction position. In contrast, the inter-trial interval has been interpreted in previous work to be the interval in which critical intra- and inter-item processing is performed during random practice. The data revealed a typical CI effect for the primary key-pressing task. Specifically, blocked-practice participants displayed superior performance during training but performed less well than the random-practice individuals at the time of retention. The poorer acquisition performance of the random-practice participants was associated with higher cognitive demand during both the pre-response and the inter-trial intervals than that of individuals assigned to blocked practice. The greater attention demands for random-practice individuals are discussed with respect to processes that might occur in both the pre-response and the inter-trial intervals.

Attention and the contextual interference effect for a continuous task

Many studies have shown that practicing several motor tasks in a random (high contextual interference) order promotes motor learning relative to practicing the same tasks in a blocked order (low contextual interference). The facilitative effect of high contextual interference has been attributed to more frequent intertask comparisons, greater difficulty in recalling task solutions between trials, and the dissimilarity among the various tasks. Each of those explanations suggests that task difficulty is increased by high contextual interference. The hypothesis of this study was that this increase in task difficulty during practice would be associated with a higher attention load during practice. This hypothesis was supported; however, high contextual interference promoted only a transient increase in retention. The short-lived effect was attributed to the continuous nature of the task and was discussed in terms of the necessary conditions for contextual interference to emerge.