Improving novel motor learning through prior high contextual interference training
Introduction
The scheduling of practice that is most suited to facilitate the acquisition of multiple motor skills has been the subject of considerable experimental examination. One practice phenomenon focused on the best practice for learning multiple related skills is examined under the general rubric of the contextual interference (CI) effect (Brady, 2004, Magill and Hall, 1990, Shea and Morgan, 1979, Wright et al., 2016). This practice effect typically involves the comparison of the learning gains from random (RP) and blocked (BP) scheduling formats. On the one hand, RP is a relatively high interference practice environment because multiple motor skills are practiced concurrently thus demanding the learner to navigate constantly changing task demands across practice. In contrast, BP induces less interference throughout training because it involves the repeated performance of the same motor task for a predetermined number of trials before practice of other motor tasks. It turns out that RP, while characterized by relatively slow initial performance during training, is more effective for supporting long-term retention of the practiced skills. This finding, while frequently reported in the laboratory environment (Wright et al., 2016), has also emerged in various applied (Goode and Magill, 1986, Ollis et al., 2005, Schneider et al., 1998, Smith and Davies, 1995) and rehabilitative settings (Adams and Page, 2000, Hanlon, 1996, Knock et al., 2000).
An important consequence of extensive physical practice is the emergence of transient functional connectivity and structural adaptation between and within neural networks to support skilled motor behavior (Dayan & Cohen, 2011). Interestingly, it is now clear that the practice schedule to which the learner is exposed, as well as extent, plays a role in promoting inter-regional functional connectivity. For example, Lin et al. (2013) examined fMRI data collected during RP and BP and noted that RP, but not BP, led to a temporary coupling between dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and premotor (PM) areas with key sensorimotor sites for up to 72-h after the completion of practice. Furthermore, as this connectivity developed there was a concomitant reduction in blood oxygenated level dependent signal at the neural sites involved which was interpreted as an increased efficiency and/or economy for planning learned behaviors via RP. Lin et al. (2013) claimed that a critical consequence of experiencing greater CI during practice was improvement in the communication between a frontal “strategic” network and the sensorimotor network to facilitate successful delayed retrieval of newly learned motor tasks (see also, Yang, Li, & Chiang, 2014). The notion that RP leads to the development of an extensive retrieval network is not new, first being noted in behavioral accounts, and is central to most descriptions of savings or retention benefits observed following high interference training (Lin et al., 2013, Shea and Zimny, 1983, Shea and Zimny, 1988, Wright et al., 2016).
To date, enhanced learning from RP is manifest as superior execution of the specific skills that are included in the original bout of BP or RP during a delayed test often administered in a random schedule format. Fewer studies have adopted a blocked test format and revealed RP benefits (Wright, Brueckner, Black, Magnuson, & Immink, 2004). Recently, a couple of studies broadened the scope of investigation of this practice phenomenon by considering the impact of recent high-CI practice on subsequent motor learning (Hodges et al., 2014, Kim et al., 2016). The specific objective of these studies was to assess the importance of the learner's practice history, particularly BP or RP, for acquisition of novel motor skills. The basic premise of these efforts was that if RP results in the establishment of an extensive memory network from recent practice experience, future learning of related skills would benefit. This might emerge as faster initial encoding of new knowledge, reflected in improved performance in acquisition, and/or superior retention of a novel skill compared to BP counterparts.
An initial assessment of this issue by Hodges et al. (2014) evaluated the influence of BP or RP on the learning of three new motor skills practiced 24-hrs later in (a) either a blocked or random format, or (b) a self-selected practice schedule. While prior RP enhanced the acquisition of novel skills on Day 2, which meant the typical performance deficit associated with a high CI practice environment was eliminated, delayed retention for the new skills was not dependent on a learner's previous training history. Kim et al. (2016), using a similar design to Hodges et al., addressed this same question but simplified the new learning environment to the acquisition of just a single rather than multiple skills, following BP or RP. Again, experience with RP accelerated the encoding of the new skill but failed to offer any further benefit across the retention interval beyond that observed from BP. These data then verified those of Hodges et al. (2014) suggesting some limited utility of a recent history with high CI training for later periods of skill acquisition.
Kim et al. (2016) noted that one feature of their study that may have restricted the effectiveness of RP for new motor learning was the use of a serial reaction time (RT) task for which the learner completed a series of seven key-presses as frequently as possible during a 30-s trial (see, Walker, Brakefield, Hobson, & Stickgold, 2003). In hindsight, the use of the serial RT task by Kim et al. may have inadvertently compromised the magnitude of CI created during RP because each 30-s trial involved the execution of 5-15 repetitions of the same motor sequence (i.e., essentially a form of BP). Thus, it is likely that the RP condition used by Kim et al. (2016) induced significantly lower CI than typically created in previous studies (Brady, 2004, Magill and Hall, 1990, Wright et al., 2016). A primary goal of the present work then was to address this shortcoming and re-evaluate the potential robustness of prior high CI training for new motor learning. To accomplish this, the present work involved the practice of a number of discrete sequence production (DSP) tasks in either a RP or BP format. The use of DSP tasks, rather than the serial-RT task, allowed RP scheduling to maximize the extent of CI by ensuring frequent changes in the motor skill executed across trials (Abrahamse, Ruitenberg, de Kleine, & Verwey, 2013). Based on the aforementioned evidence, acquisition of a novel motor sequence is expected to be facilitated following RP but not BP. It is also possible that by maximizing CI during the initial bout of RP, retention benefits for the new sequence will emerge.
An additional advantage of using the DSP task in the present work was the opportunity to probe the locus of any facilitation in novel skill acquisition and/or retention following training under different practice formats. Abrahamse et al. (2013) proposed that the execution of a DSP task involves three distinct planning processes. The first process, referred to as sequence initiation is reflected in the time to complete the first key-press of a DSP task. This process involves selection and preparation of the DSP task including readying its initial motor chunk. A relatively slow key-press typically observed in the middle of a DSP task, the concatenation point, indexes a cost of transitioning between motor chunks that comprise the DSP task. Finally, all other key-presses are usually executed considerably faster, often with an RT lower than 100 ms, than those associated with the initiation and concatenation processes. This latency reflects the cost of executing the most primitive element (i.e., key-press) contained in a motor chunk. Assuming experience with prior RP contributes to improvement in a memory retrieval processes for newly learned skills, it seems reasonable to assume that any retention benefits that emerge would most likely to be observed for the sequence production processes most dependent on retrieval, that is, initiation and maybe concatenation (but see Verwey, Abrahamse, & Eikelboom, 2010) rather than execution.
Section snippets
Participants
Participants were right-handed undergraduate students (N = 36) that received course credit for their participation. They had no prior experience with the experimental tasks and were unaware of the specific purpose of the study. All participants completed an informed consent approved by an Institutional Review Board before any involvement in the experiment.
Apparatus and task
The motor skills used in the present work are characterized as discrete sequence production (DSP) tasks (Abrahamse et al., 2013). These tasks
Acquisition
For the purpose of analyzing the acquisition data, each block of 99 trials was divided into three blocks of 33 trials including 11 trials of each of the three practiced DSP tasks resulting in nine blocks of acquisition data. Mean TT for each of these blocks was calculated for each individual. Fig. 2A displays mean TT for each block of acquisition as a function of the RP and BP conditions. Mean TT for each block for each individual during acquisition was submitted to a 2 (Practice Schedule: RP,
Discussion
The present study was, at least in part, designed to examine a potential shortcoming in earlier work by Kim et al. (2016) that may have limited the extent of and the resultant effectiveness of prior RP experience for future learning (see also, Hodges et al., 2014). Specifically, the use of a serial RT task by Kim et al. inadvertently created a modified BP schedule thus reducing the degree of CI created in their RP condition. In the present case, the use of a DSP task afforded the opportunity to
References (40)
- et al.
Neuroplasticity subserving motor skill learning
Neuron
(2011) - et al.
Contributions of the basal ganglia and functionally related brain structures to motor learning
Behavioural Brain Research
(2009) Motor learning following unilateral stroke
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
(1996)- et al.
A quantitative meta-analysis and review of motor learning in the human brain
NeuroImage
(2013) - et al.
Allowing time to consolidate knowledge gained through random practice facilitates later novel motor sequence acquisition
Acta Psychologica
(2016) - et al.
A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition
Human Movement Science
(1990) - et al.
The influence of professional expertise and task complexity upon the potency of the contextual interference effect
Acta Psychologica
(2005) - et al.
Parallel contributions of cerebellar, striatal and M1 mechanisms to motor sequence learning
Behavioural Brain Research
(2012) - et al.
Action sets and decisions in the medial frontal cortex
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2004) - et al.
Acute exercise improves motor memory: Exploring potential biomarkers
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
(2014)
Using group independent component analysis to investigate resting-state functional networks underlying motor sequence learning
Control of automated behavior: Insights from the discrete sequence production task
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Effects of selected practice and feedback variables on speech motor learning
Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology
Sleep to remember
The Neuroscientist
Contextual interference: A meta-analytic study
Perceptual and Motor Skills
The brain's default network - anatomy, function, and relevance to disease
Neural substrates of contextual interference during motor learning support a model of active preparation
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Distinguishable brain activation networks for short- and long-term motor skill learning
Journal of Neurophysiology
Contextual interference effects in learning 3 badminton serves
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Exploring the dynamic nature of contextual interference: Previous experience affects current practice but not learning
Journal of Motor Behavior
Cited by (16)
Improving consolidation by applying anodal transcranial direct current stimulation at primary motor cortex during repetitive practice
2021, Neurobiology of Learning and MemoryCitation Excerpt :This began with stable performance across the first 6-h following the termination of training. Repetitive practice of course is more commonly associated with significant forgetting during this period as evidence by individuals in the Repetitive-Sham condition in the present work (Lin et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2018; Kim and Wright, 2020). Moreover, it’s also worth noting that performance of the individuals in the Repetitive-Anodal condition at this time juncture was consistent with the pattern displayed by participants in the Interleaved-Sham condition (see Fig. 3).
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Supplementary Motor Region Impacts the Effectiveness of Interleaved and Repetitive Practice Schedules for Retention of Motor Skills
2020, NeuroscienceCitation Excerpt :Two sham control conditions (IP-Sham, RP-Sham) that did not involve real stimulation, but mimicked CI conditions typically used when addressing the impact of this practice feature on skill acquisition. Performance of set of motor sequences was evaluated during a period of practice (i.e., online) and a series of delayed tests (i.e., offline) using total response time (TT) as the primary dependent variable (Kim et al., 2018). It was expected that the individuals assigned to RP-sham would exhibit superior online performance compared to individuals exposed to IP-sham.
Practice variability promotes an external focus of attention and enhances motor skill learning
2019, Human Movement ScienceCitation Excerpt :In addition, delayed retention test performance was more effective after random relative to blocked practice in Experiment 3. These learning advantages were independent of the type of task (overhand throwing in Experiments 1 and 3, golf putting in Experiment 2) and they are consistent with previous findings (e.g., Kim, Chen, Verwey, & Wright, 2018; Lee & Magill, 1983; Porter & Magill, 2010; Shea & Morgan, 1979; Simon & Bjork, 2001). The findings are similar to those found for other types of learning.
C-SMB 2.0: Integrating over 25 years of motor sequencing research with the Discrete Sequence Production task
2023, Psychonomic Bulletin and ReviewEffective practice and instruction: A skill acquisition framework for excellence
2023, Journal of Sports Sciences