Abstract
Procedural learning refers to the ability to learn new perceptual, motor or cognitive skills. While many studies have explored procedural learning abilities in patients with different types of brain damage, the cognitive mechanisms involved in the acquisition of a new skill are still not well understood. The present review focuses on the conditions that optimise skill acquisition, and more specifically on the contextual interference effect (CIE), which refers to the advantage of a 'random' over a 'blocked' practice condition in skill learning tasks. According to both the 'elaboration' and 'reconstruction' hypotheses, the CIE can be explained by the fact that the random schedule requires more cognitive activity than the blocked one. However, if the CIE has been consistently demonstrated in laboratory studies, it is not so clear in field-based studies. We discuss this 'laboratory and field dilemma', and suggest that two main factors – task complexity and individual variables – may explain the discrepancy between the two types of studies.
Highlights
Procedural learning is a concept that has been studied a good deal in recent years (e.g., Anderson, 1992; Beaunieux, 2006; Churchill, Stanis, Press, Kushelev, & Greenough, 2003; Deweer, Ergis, Fossati, Pillon, Boller, Agid et al, 1994; Osman, Wilkinson, Beigi, Castaneda, & Jahanshahi, 2008)
We will close this review with a conclusion in which we suggest some leads for future studies of the contextual interference effect
We have found four main theoretical perspectives that attempt to account for the contextual interference effect (CIE): the elaboration hypothesis (Shea & Zimny, 1983), the action-plan reconstruction hypothesis (Lee & Magill, 1983), the Retroactive Inhibition Explanation (Davis, 1988; Meeuwsen & Magill, 1991), and Schmidt’s schema theory (Schmidt, 1975, 1988)
Summary
Procedural learning refers to the ability to learn new perceptual, motor or cognitive skills. The present review focuses on the conditions that optimise skill acquisition, and on the contextual interference effect (CIE), which refers to the advantage of a ‘random’ over a ‘blocked’ practice condition in skill learning tasks According to both the ‘elaboration’ and ‘reconstruction’ hypotheses, the CIE can be explained by the fact that the random schedule requires more cognitive activity than the blocked one. If the CIE has been consistently demonstrated in laboratory studies, it is not so clear in field-based studies We discuss this ‘laboratory and field dilemma’, and suggest that two main factors – task complexity and individual variables – may explain the discrepancy between the two types of studies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
