↓ Skip to main content

Transfer in Motor Sequence Learning: Effects of Practice Schedule and Sequence Context

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Transfer in Motor Sequence Learning: Effects of Practice Schedule and Sequence Context
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00642
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diana M Müssgens, Fredrik Ullén

Abstract

Transfer (i.e., the application of a learned skill in a novel context) is an important and desirable outcome of motor skill learning. While much research has been devoted to understanding transfer of explicit skills the mechanisms of skill transfer after incidental learning remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to (1) examine the effect of practice schedule on transfer and (2) investigate whether sequence-specific knowledge can transfer to an unfamiliar sequence context. We trained two groups of participants on an implicit serial response time task under a Constant (one sequence for 10 blocks) or Variable (alternating between two sequences for a total of 10 blocks) practice schedule. We evaluated response times for three types of transfer: task-general transfer to a structurally non-overlapping sequence, inter-manual transfer to a perceptually identical sequence, and sequence-specific transfer to a partially overlapping (three shared triplets) sequence. Results showed partial skill transfer to all three sequences and an advantage of Variable practice only for task-general transfer. Further, we found expression of sequence-specific knowledge for familiar sub-sequences in the overlapping sequence. These findings suggest that (1) constant practice may create interference for task-general transfer and (2) sequence-specific knowledge can transfer to a new sequential context.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 127 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 16%
Student > Master 20 16%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 29 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 28 22%
Psychology 22 17%
Sports and Recreations 16 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 31 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#4,012,938
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,875
of 7,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,678
of 386,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#39
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 386,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 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 72% of its contemporaries.