↓ Skip to main content

Serial practice impairs motor skill consolidation

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Serial practice impairs motor skill consolidation
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00221-017-4992-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristin-Marie Neville, Maxime Trempe

Abstract

Recent reports have revealed that motor skill learning is impaired if two skills are practiced one after the other, that is before the first skill has had the time to become consolidated. This suggests that motor skills should be practiced in isolation from one another to minimize interference. At the moment, little is known about the effect of practice schedules high in contextual interference on motor skill consolidation. In Experiment 1, we investigated whether a serial practice schedule impairs motor skill consolidation. Participants had to learn two distinct sequences of finger movements (A and B) under either a blocked practice schedule or a serial practice schedule before being retested the following day. A control group also practiced Sequence A only. Our results revealed that a blocked practice schedule led to no interference between the sequences, whereas a serial practice schedule impaired the consolidation of Sequence B. In Experiment 2, we investigated the origin of the interference caused by a serial practice schedule by replacing the physical practice of Sequence A with either the observation of a model performing Sequence A or by asking participants to produce random finger movements. Our results revealed that both tasks interfered with the consolidation of Sequence B. Thus, we suggest that a serial practice schedule impairs motor skill consolidation through a conflict in the brain networks involved in the acquisition of the cognitive representation of the sequence and its execution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 21%
Sports and Recreations 12 19%
Psychology 10 16%
Engineering 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 17 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,862,644
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#759
of 3,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,718
of 316,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#19
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.