Skip to main content
Log in

Implicit sequence learning in a continuous pursuit-tracking task

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Assessing implicit learning in the continuous pursuit-tracking task usually concerns a repeated segment of target displacements masked by two random segments, as referred to as Pew’s paradigm. Evidence for segment learning in this paradigm is scanty and contrasts with robust sequence learning in discrete tracking tasks. The present study investigates this issue with two experiments in which participants (N = 56) performed a continuous tracking task. Contrary to Pew’s paradigm, participants were presented with a training sequence that was continuously cycled during 14 blocks of practice, but Block 12 in which a transfer sequence was introduced. Results demonstrate sequence learning in several conditions except in the condition that was obviously the most similar to previous studies failing to induce segment learning. Specifically, it is shown here that a target moving too slowly combined with variable time at which target reversal occurs prevents sequence learning. In addition, data from a post-experimental recognition test indicate that sequence learning was associated with explicit perceptual knowledge about the repetitive structure. We propose that learning repetition in a continuous tracking task is conditional on its capacity to (1) allow participants to detect the repeated regularities and (2) restrict feedback-based tracking strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. A. (1961). Human tracking behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 58, 55–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, D. C., & Broadbent, D. E. (1988). Interactive tasks and the implicit-explicit distinction. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 51–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambaron, S., Ginhac, D., Ferrel-Chapus, C., & Perruchet, P. (2006). Implicit learning of a repeated segment in a continuous tracking: A reappraisal. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 845–854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambaron, S., Ginhac, D., & Perruchet, P. (2008). Is learning in SRT tasks robust across methodological variations? L’Année Psychologique, 108, 465–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleeremans, A., Destrebecqz, A., & Boyer, M. (1998). Implicit learning: News from the front. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 406–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Destrebecqz, A., & Cleeremans, A. (2001). Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 343–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang, A., Gapenne, O., & Rovira, K. (2011). Questioning implicit motor learning as instantiated by the pursuit tracking task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(10), 2003–2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magill, R. A. (1998). Knowledge is more than we can talk about: Implicit learning in motor skill acquisition. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69, 104–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirement of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perruchet, P. (2008). Implicit learning. In H. L. Roediger III (Ed.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (Vol. 2, pp. 597–621). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Perruchet, P., & Amorim, M.-A. (1992). Conscious knowledge and changes in performance in sequence learning: Evidence against dissociation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 785–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perruchet, P., Chambaron, S., & Ferrel-Chapus, C. (2003). Learning from implicit learning literature: Comment on Shea, Wulf, Whitacre, and Park (2001). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 769–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perruchet, P., & Vinter, A. (2002). The self-organizing consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 297–388.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pew, R. W. (1974). Levels of analysis in motor control. Brain Research, 71, 393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 585–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberston, E. M. (2007). The serial reaction time task: Implicit motor skill learning? The Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 10073–10075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seger, C. A. (1994). Implicit learning. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 163–196.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, D. R., & Channon, S. (2002). Effects of a secondary task on ‘‘implicit’’ sequence learning: Learning or performance? Psychological Research, 66, 99–109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, D. R., Rowland, L. A., & Ranger, M. S. (2005a). Attentional load and implicit sequence learning. Psychological Research, 69, 369–382.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, D. R., & St. John, M. F. (1994). Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 367–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, D. R., Rowland, L. A., & Ranger, M. S. (2005b). Attentional load and implicit sequence learning. Psychological Research, 69, 369–382.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shea, C., Wulf, G., Whitacre, C. A., & Park, J. (2001). Surfing the implicit wave. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 841–862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, L., & Shanks, D. R. (2004). Intentional control and implicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 354–369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, G. (2007). Attentional focus and motor learning: a review of 10 years of research. E-Journal Bewegung und Training, 1, 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, G., Hoss, M., & Prinz, W. (1998). Instructions for motor learning: Differential effects of internal versus external focus of attention. Journal of Motor Behavior, 30, 169–179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, G., & Schmidt, R. A. (1997). Variability of practice and implicit motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 987–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2004). Understanding the role of augmented feedback: The good, the bad and the ugly. In A. M. Williams & N. J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory and practice (pp. 121–144). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to Peter Pfordresher, Pierre Perruchet and Richard Ivry for their valuable comments and suggestions on previous versions of this article. We also thank John Stewart for careful review of the English style of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandre Lang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lang, A., Gapenne, O., Aubert, D. et al. Implicit sequence learning in a continuous pursuit-tracking task. Psychological Research 77, 517–527 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0460-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0460-x

Keywords

Navigation