Self-controlled practice and nudging during structural learning of a novel control interface
Abstract
Self-controlled practice schedules have been shown to enhance motor learning in several contexts, but their effectiveness in structural learning tasks, where the goal is to eventually learn an underlying structure or rule, is not well known. Here we examined the use of self-controlled practice in a novel control interface requiring structural learning. In addition, we examined the effect of nudging - i.e., whether altering task difficulty could influence self-selected strategies, and hence facilitate learning. Participants wore four inertial measurement units (IMUs) on their upper body and the goal was to use motions of the upper body to move a screen cursor to different targets presented on the screen. The structure in this task that had to be learned was based on the fact that the signals from the IMUs were linearly mapped to the x- and y-position of the cursor. Participants (N = 62) were split into 3 groups (random, self-selected, nudge) based on whether they had control over the sequence in which they could practice the targets. To test whether participants learned the underlying structure, participants were tested both on the trained targets, as well as novel targets that were not practiced during training. Results showed that during training, the self-selected group showed shorter movement times relative to the random group, and both self-selected and nudge groups adopted a strategy of tending to repeat targets. However, in the test phase, we found no significant differences in task performance between groups, indicating that structural learning was not reliably affected by the type of practice. In addition, nudging participants by adjusting task difficulty did not show any significant benefits to overall learning. These results suggest that although self-controlled practice influenced practice structure and facilitated learning, it did not provide any additional benefits relative to practicing on a random schedule in this task.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Field percentile
- 3th percentile
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Distinct optimization of motor control and learning: Motor learning achieves different motor patterns from overtrained self-paced movements
Takuji Hayashi, Ken Takiyama·bioRxiv·Oct 23, 2024
- De novo learning versus adaptation of continuous control in a manual tracking task
Christopher S. Yang, Noah John Cowan, Adrian Mark Haith·eLifePeer-reviewed·Jun 25, 2021
- De novo motor learning of a bimanual control task over multiple days of practice
Adrian Mark Haith, Christopher S. Yang, … Kahori Kita·Journal of NeurophysiologyPeer-reviewed·Sep 21, 2022
- Intermanual transfer of visuomotor learning is facilitated by a cognitive strategy
Jack De Havas, Patrick Haggard, … Nobuhiro Hagura·bioRxiv·Oct 12, 2021
- De Novo Sensorimotor Learning Through Reuse of Movement Components
George Gabriel, Faisal Mushtaq, J. Ryan Morehead·PLoS Computational BiologyPeer-reviewed·Oct 10, 2024
- Abstract sequential task control is facilitated by practice and embedded motor sequences
Juliana E. Trach, Theresa H. McKim, Theresa M. Desrochers·Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and CognitionPeer-reviewed·Sep 13, 2021