Proteau L, Cournoyer J
Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada.
Q J Exp Psychol A. 1990 Nov;42(4):811-28. doi: 10.1080/14640749008401251.
Nearly a decade ago, Carlton (1981) showed that in a manual aiming task, vision of the ongoing stylus led to a better accuracy than when that source of information was not available. However, Elliott (1988) recently failed to replicate that finding and, rather, showed that being able to see an ongoing stylus did not result in a significant improvement of accuracy over a conventional no-vision condition. In the experiment to be reported here, we, on the one hand, replicated Elliott's results for the low level of practice condition (15 acquisition trials). On the other hand, the results obtained after moderate practice (150 acquisition trials) supported Carlton's earlier conclusion. These results therefore indicate that after sufficient practice one is able to use effectively the information provided by the ongoing stylus to help control his/her movement. This conclusion was further substantiated by the results obtained in a transfer task. Collectively, the results gave added support to a specificity of learning hypothesis (Proteau, Marteniuk, Girouard, & Dugas, 1987; Proteau, Marteniuk, & Lévesque, 1990).
近十年前，卡尔顿（1981年）指出，在一项手动瞄准任务中，在操作过程中能看到笔尖比看不到该信息源时的准确性更高。然而，埃利奥特（1988年）最近未能重复这一发现，相反，他发现，与传统的无视觉条件相比，能够看到正在操作的笔尖并不会显著提高准确性。在即将在此报告的实验中，一方面，我们重复了埃利奥特在低练习水平条件下（15次习得试验）的结果。另一方面，在适度练习（150次习得试验）后获得的结果支持了卡尔顿早期的结论。因此，这些结果表明，经过充分练习后，人们能够有效地利用正在操作的笔尖所提供的信息来帮助控制自己的动作。在一项迁移任务中获得的结果进一步证实了这一结论。总体而言，这些结果为学习特异性假设（普罗托、马滕纽克、吉鲁阿尔和迪加斯，1987年；普罗托、马滕纽克和莱维克，1990年）提供了更多支持。
