Individual differences in implicit motor learning: task specificity in sensorimotor adaptation and sequence learning.

In standard taxonomies, motor skills are typically treated as representative of implicit or procedural memory. We examined two emblematic tasks of implicit motor learning, sensorimotor adaptation and sequence learning, asking whether individual differences in learning are correlated between these tasks, as well as how individual differences within each task are related to different performance variables. As a prerequisite, it was essential to establish the reliability of learning measures for each task. Participants were tested twice on a visuomotor adaptation task and on a sequence learning task, either the serial reaction time task or the alternating reaction time task. Learning was evident in all tasks at the group level and reliable at the individual level in visuomotor adaptation and the alternating reaction time task but not in the serial reaction time task. Performance variability was predictive of learning in both domains, yet the relationship was in the opposite direction for adaptation and sequence learning. For the former, faster learning was associated with lower variability, consistent with models of sensorimotor adaptation in which learning rates are sensitive to noise. For the latter, greater learning was associated with higher variability and slower reaction times, factors that may facilitate the spread of activation required to form predictive, sequential associations. Interestingly, learning measures of the different tasks were not correlated. Together, these results oppose a shared process for implicit learning in sensorimotor adaptation and sequence learning and provide insight into the factors that account for individual differences in learning within each task domain. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We investigated individual differences in the ability to implicitly learn motor skills. As a prerequisite, we assessed whether individual differences were reliable across test sessions. We found that two commonly used tasks of implicit learning, visuomotor adaptation and the alternating serial reaction time task, exhibited good test-retest reliability in measures of learning and performance. However, the learning measures did not correlate between the two tasks, arguing against a shared process for implicit motor learning.

[1]  Matthew J. Crossley,et al.  Savings upon Re-Aiming in Visuomotor Adaptation , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[2]  Beat Meier,et al.  Offline consolidation in implicit sequence learning , 2014, Cortex.

[3]  O. Donchin,et al.  Structural correlates of motor adaptation deficits in patients with acute focal lesions of the cerebellum , 2014, Experimental Brain Research.

[4]  N. Bohnen,et al.  Association of COMT val158met and DRD2 G>T genetic polymorphisms with individual differences in motor learning and performance in female young adults. , 2014, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  Yohsuke R. Miyamoto,et al.  Temporal structure of motor variability is dynamically regulated and predicts motor learning ability , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[6]  Karolina Janacsek,et al.  Age-dependent and coordinated shift in performance between implicit and explicit skill learning , 2013, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[7]  John E. Schlerf,et al.  Individuals with cerebellar degeneration show similar adaptation deficits with large and small visuomotor errors. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[8]  Markus Martini,et al.  Working Memory and Its Relation to Deterministic Sequence Learning , 2013, PloS one.

[9]  M. Parazzini,et al.  Modulating Human Procedural Learning by Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation , 2013, The Cerebellum.

[10]  R. Seidler,et al.  Cerebellar contributions to visuomotor adaptation and motor sequence learning: an ALE meta-analysis , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[11]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Individual differences in the exploration of a redundant space-time motor task , 2012, Neuroscience Letters.

[12]  J. Anguera,et al.  Neurocognitive Contributions to Motor Skill Learning: The Role of Working Memory , 2012, Journal of motor behavior.

[13]  Susanne M. Jaeggi,et al.  Resting state cortico-cerebellar functional connectivity networks: a comparison of anatomical and self-organizing map approaches , 2012, Front. Neuroanat..

[14]  J. Fiser,et al.  The best time to acquire new skills: age-related differences in implicit sequence learning across the human lifespan. , 2012, Developmental science.

[15]  Paul J Reber,et al.  Operating characteristics of the implicit learning system supporting serial interception sequence learning. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  R. Ivry,et al.  Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences the Role of Strategies in Motor Learning , 2022 .

[17]  Karolina Janacsek,et al.  Predicting the future: from implicit learning to consolidation. , 2012, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[18]  R. Seidler,et al.  Working memory capacity correlates with implicit serial reaction time task performance , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  P. Celnik,et al.  Dissociating the roles of the cerebellum and motor cortex during adaptive learning: the motor cortex retains what the cerebellum learns. , 2011, Cerebral cortex.

[20]  Marisa O. Hollinshead,et al.  The organization of the human cerebral cortex estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  G. Rees,et al.  The structural basis of inter-individual differences in human behaviour and cognition , 2011, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[22]  Daniel J. Sanchez,et al.  Performing the unexplainable: Implicit task performance reveals individually reliable sequence learning without explicit knowledge , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[23]  R. Ivry,et al.  An Explicit Strategy Prevails When the Cerebellum Fails to Compute Movement Errors , 2010, The Cerebellum.

[24]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Error correction, sensory prediction, and adaptation in motor control. , 2010, Annual review of neuroscience.

[25]  Sarah E. Criscimagna-Hemminger,et al.  Size of error affects cerebellar contributions to motor learning. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[26]  Christopher M. Conway,et al.  Implicit statistical learning in language processing: Word predictability is the key , 2010, Cognition.

[27]  Karolina Janacsek,et al.  Sleep has no critical role in implicit motor sequence learning in young and old adults , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  Konrad P. Körding,et al.  Uncertainty of Feedback and State Estimation Determines the Speed of Motor Adaptation , 2009, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[29]  D. Timmann,et al.  Visuomotor adaptive improvement and aftereffects are impaired differentially following cerebellar lesions in SCA and PICA territory , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[30]  R. J. Beers,et al.  Motor Learning Is Optimally Tuned to the Properties of Motor Noise , 2009, Neuron.

[31]  Fenna M. Krienen,et al.  Segregated Fronto-Cerebellar Circuits Revealed by Intrinsic Functional Connectivity , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

[32]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  Sequence Learning is Preserved in Individuals with Cerebellar Degeneration when the Movements are Directly Cued , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[33]  W. Fias,et al.  Disentangling perceptual from motor implicit sequence learning with a serial color-matching task , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[34]  P. Strick,et al.  Cerebellum and nonmotor function. , 2009, Annual review of neuroscience.

[35]  D Timmann,et al.  Adaptation to visuomotor rotation and force field perturbation is correlated to different brain areas in patients with cerebellar degeneration. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[36]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Contribution of night and day sleep vs. simple passage of time to the consolidation of motor sequence and visuomotor adaptation learning , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[37]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Explaining savings for visuomotor adaptation: linear time-invariant state-space models are not sufficient. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[38]  Susanne Ferber,et al.  Direct effects of prismatic lenses on visuomotor control: an event‐related functional MRI study , 2008, The European journal of neuroscience.

[39]  Nava Rubin,et al.  Bi-stable depth ordering of superimposed moving gratings. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[40]  M. Ernst,et al.  The statistical determinants of adaptation rate in human reaching. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[41]  Gilbert Remillard,et al.  Implicit Learning of Second-, Third-, and Fourth-Order Adjacent and Nonadjacent Sequential Dependencies , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[42]  Elisabeth Norman,et al.  Gradations of awareness in a modified sequence learning task , 2007, Consciousness and Cognition.

[43]  E. Robertson The Serial Reaction Time Task: Implicit Motor Skill Learning? , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[44]  Derek T. Y. Mann,et al.  Perceptual-cognitive expertise in sport: a meta-analysis. , 2007, Journal of sport & exercise psychology.

[45]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Sensory prediction errors drive cerebellum-dependent adaptation of reaching. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[46]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  The dynamics of memory as a consequence of optimal adaptation to a changing body , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[47]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Calibration of visually guided reaching is driven by error-corrective learning and internal dynamics. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[48]  Yves Rossetti,et al.  Enhancing Visuomotor Adaptation by Reducing Error Signals: Single-step (Aware) versus Multiple-step (Unaware) Exposure to Wedge Prisms , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[49]  Rachael D. Seidler,et al.  Differential effects of age on sequence learning and sensorimotor adaptation , 2006, Brain Research Bulletin.

[50]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  Sleep-Dependent Consolidation of Contextual Learning , 2006, Current Biology.

[51]  Yasmin L. Hashambhoy,et al.  Neural Correlates of Reach Errors , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[52]  R. Shadmehr,et al.  Intact ability to learn internal models of arm dynamics in Huntington's disease but not cerebellar degeneration. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[53]  David R. Shanks,et al.  Attentional load and implicit sequence learning , 2005, Psychological research.

[54]  A. McIntosh,et al.  Time course of changes in brain activity and functional connectivity associated with long-term adaptation to a rotational transformation. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[55]  R. Engle,et al.  Individual differences in working memory capacity and learning: Evidence from the serial reaction time task , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[56]  Leonora Wilkinson,et al.  Intentional control and implicit sequence learning. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[57]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning , 2004, Nature.

[58]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Sequence Learning in Patients with Parkinson's Disease or Cerebellar Lesions , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[59]  P. Strick,et al.  Cerebellar Loops with Motor Cortex and Prefrontal Cortex of a Nonhuman Primate , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[60]  S. Keele,et al.  The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. , 2003, Psychological review.

[61]  R C Miall,et al.  System Identification Applied to a Visuomotor Task: Near-Optimal Human Performance in a Noisy Changing Task , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[62]  J. Ashe,et al.  Cerebellum Activation Associated with Performance Change but Not Motor Learning , 2002, Science.

[63]  Junichiro Yoshimoto,et al.  Control of exploitation-exploration meta-parameter in reinforcement learning , 2002, Neural Networks.

[64]  N Ramnani,et al.  Learning- and expectation-related changes in the human brain during motor learning. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[65]  Reza Shadmehr,et al.  Learning of action through adaptive combination of motor primitives , 2000, Nature.

[66]  R. E. Passingham,et al.  The cerebellum and cognition: cerebellar lesions impair sequence learning but not conditional visuomotor learning in monkeys , 2000, Neuropsychologia.

[67]  F Rösler,et al.  Implicit and explicit learning of event sequences: evidence for distinct coding of perceptual and motor representations. , 2000, Acta psychologica.

[68]  O. Koenig,et al.  Procedural learning in Parkinson’s disease: Intact and impaired cognitive components , 1999, Neuropsychologia.

[69]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Abstract and Effector-Specific Representations of Motor Sequences Identified with PET , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[70]  K. Linnet,et al.  Performance of Deming regression analysis in case of misspecified analytical error ratio in method comparison studies. , 1998, Clinical chemistry.

[71]  O. Hikosaka,et al.  Role of monkey cerebellar nuclei in skill for sequential movement. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[72]  Á. Pascual-Leone,et al.  Effect of focal cerebellar lesions on procedural learning in the serial reaction time task , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[73]  L. Squire,et al.  Encapsulation of Implicit and Explicit Memory in Sequence Learning , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[74]  J. H. Howard,et al.  Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns. , 1997, Psychology and aging.

[75]  M. Molinari,et al.  Cerebellum and procedural learning: evidence from focal cerebellar lesions. , 1997, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[76]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Adaptation to gradual as compared with sudden visuo-motor distortions , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[77]  L. Squire,et al.  Structure and function of declarative and nondeclarative memory systems. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[78]  W. T. Thach,et al.  Throwing while looking through prisms. I. Focal olivocerebellar lesions impair adaptation. , 1996, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[79]  L. Squire,et al.  Parallel brain systems for learning with and without awareness. , 1994, Learning & memory.

[80]  B. Murdoch,et al.  The Effect of Repeated Prime-Target Presentation in Manipulating Attention-Induced Priming in Persons with Dementia of the Alzheimer′s Type , 1994, Brain and Cognition.

[81]  M. Hallett,et al.  Procedural learning in Parkinson's disease and cerebellar degeneration , 1993, Annals of neurology.

[82]  K. Linnet,et al.  Evaluation of regression procedures for methods comparison studies. , 1993, Clinical chemistry.

[83]  M. Amorim,et al.  Conscious knowledge and changes in performance in sequence learning: evidence against dissociation. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[84]  Daniel B. Willingham,et al.  On the development of procedural knowledge. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[85]  S. Keele,et al.  Timing Functions of The Cerebellum , 1989, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[86]  S W Keele,et al.  Force control and its relation to timing. , 1987, Journal of motor behavior.

[87]  M. Nissen,et al.  Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.

[88]  S. Keele,et al.  Do perception and motor production share common timing mechanisms: a correctional analysis. , 1985, Acta psychologica.

[89]  S W Keele,et al.  Explorations of individual differences relevant to high level skill. , 1982, Journal of motor behavior.

[90]  N Gochman,et al.  Incorrect least-squares regression coefficients in method-comparison analysis. , 1979, Clinical chemistry.

[91]  L. Pinneo On noise in the nervous system. , 1966, Psychological review.

[92]  J. C. Bachman Specificity vs. Generality in Learning and Performing Two Large Muscle Motor Tasks , 1961 .

[93]  H. Gulliksen Theory of mental tests , 1952 .

[94]  C E Seashore,et al.  AN OBJECTIVE METHOD OF EVALUATING MUSICAL PERFORMANCE. , 1930, Science.

[95]  D. Brouwer Determination of Orbits of Comets and Asteroids , 1930 .

[96]  Jörn Diedrichsen,et al.  Cerebellar regions involved in adaptation to force field and visuomotor perturbation. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[97]  Christopher L. Asplund,et al.  The organization of the human cerebellum estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[98]  John W Krakauer,et al.  Motor learning and consolidation: the case of visuomotor rotation. , 2009, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[99]  Xi Zhang,et al.  The interaction of implicit learning, explicit hypothesis testing learning and implicit-to-explicit knowledge extraction , 2007, Neural Networks.

[100]  Richard S. Sutton,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction , 1998, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[101]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Attention and stimulus characteristics determine the locus of motor-sequence encoding. A PET study. , 1997, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[102]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[103]  M. HenryF.,et al.  Specificity vs.generality in learning motor skill , 1968 .

[104]  James F. Parker,et al.  Ability factors and component performance measures as predictors of complex tracking behavior. , 1960 .

[105]  George Sperling,et al.  The information available in brief visual presentations. , 1960 .

[106]  Wm. R. Wright General Intelligence, Objectively Determined and Measured. , 1905 .