Koedijker Johan M, Oudejans Raôul R D, Beek Peter J
Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J Mot Behav. 2010 Jul-Aug;42(4):209-22. doi: 10.1080/00222895.2010.481694.
Three experiments were conducted to examine proactive and retroactive interference effects in learning two similar sequences of discrete movements. In each experiment, the participants in the experimental group practiced two movement sequences on consecutive days (1 on each day, order counterbalanced across participants) followed by retention tests on the third day. In all, 2 out of 8 target locations differed between the 2 sequences. Experiment 1 established the nature of the interference effects in the present setup. Clear evidence was found for button-specific proactive and retroactive interference effects. Experiments 2 and 3 further probed the mechanisms underlying those effects, by varying the numbers of repetitions (50 or 250) of the 1st and 2nd sequence (Experiment 2) and the hand, dominant or nondominant, with which the sequences were practiced (Experiment 3). Experiment 2 showed that after a mere 50 repetitions, the representation of the movement structure was strong enough to evoke the effects observed in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 revealed that learning with the dominant hand did not result in more pronounced interference effects compared with learning with the nondominant hand. In combination, these results suggest that changes in the representation of the movement structure are primarily responsible for the observed interference effects.
进行了三项实验，以检验在学习两个相似的离散动作序列时的前摄干扰和倒摄干扰效应。在每项实验中，实验组的参与者连续两天练习两个动作序列（每天一个，顺序在参与者之间进行平衡），然后在第三天进行保持测试。两个序列中共有8个目标位置中的2个不同。实验1确定了当前设置中干扰效应的性质。发现了明确的针对按钮的前摄干扰和倒摄干扰效应的证据。实验2和实验3通过改变第一个和第二个序列的重复次数（50次或250次）（实验2）以及练习序列时使用的手（优势手或非优势手）（实验3），进一步探究了这些效应背后的机制。实验2表明，仅仅经过50次重复后，动作结构的表征就足够强大，能够引发在实验1中观察到的效应。实验3表明，与使用非优势手学习相比，使用优势手学习并不会导致更明显的干扰效应。综合起来，这些结果表明，动作结构表征的变化是观察到的干扰效应的主要原因。
