Contextual Interference Effect: Elaborative Processing or Forgetting-Reconstruction? A Post Hoc Analysis of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-Induced Effects on Motor Learning

The elaborative-processing and forgetting-reconstruction hypotheses are the 2 principal explanations for the contextual interference (CI) effect. The present authors' purpose was to identify which of these 2 hypotheses better accounts for the CI effect. They synchronized single transcranial mag...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of motor behavior 2008-11, Vol.40 (6), p.578-586
Main Authors: Lin, Chien-Ho (Janice), Fisher, Beth E., Winstein, Carolee J., Wu, Allan D., Gordon, James
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Attention - physiology
Brain
contextual interference
Experimental Groups
Feedback (Response)
Field Dependence-Independence
Humans
Information Processing
Inhibition (Psychology)
Learning - physiology
Mean square errors
Memory
Motor ability
Motor Cortex - physiology
motor learning
Motor Skills - physiology
Neurological disorders
Physical therapy
Practice (Psychology)
Pregnancy
Principals
Psychological Theory
Reference Values
Research Design
Retention (Psychology) - physiology
Short Term Memory
Skill Development
Task analysis
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The elaborative-processing and forgetting-reconstruction hypotheses are the 2 principal explanations for the contextual interference (CI) effect. The present authors' purpose was to identify which of these 2 hypotheses better accounts for the CI effect. They synchronized single transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) pulses to each intertrial interval to modulate information processing during Blocked and Random Practice conditions. Participants practiced 3 arm tasks with either a Blocked or Random Practice order. The 3 stimulation conditions (No TMS, TMS, Sham TMS) by 2-practice order (Blocked, Random) between-participant design resulted in 6 experimental groups. Without TMS, motor learning increased under Random Practice. With TMS, this learning benefit diminished. These results support the elaborative-processing hypothesis by showing that perturbing information processing, evoked by Random Practice, deteriorates the learning benefit. Unlike the prediction of the forgetting-reconstruction hypothesis, adding perturbation during Blocked Practice did not significantly enhance motor learning.
ISSN:0022-2895
1940-1027
DOI:10.3200/JMBR.40.6.578-586