Intention and attention in ideomotor learning.

Human actions may be carried out in response to exogenous stimuli (stimulus based) or they may be selected endogenously on the basis of the agent's intentions (intention based). We studied the functional differences between these two types of action during action–effect (ideomotor) learning. Participants underwent an acquisition phase, in which each key-press (left/right) triggered a specific tone (low pitch/high pitch) either in a stimulus-based or in an intention-based action mode. Consistent with previous findings, we demonstrate that auditory action effects gain the ability to prime their associated responses in a later test phase only if the actions were selected endogenously during acquisition phase. Furthermore, we show that this difference in ideomotor learning is not due to different attentional demands for stimulus-based and intention-based actions. Our results suggest that ideomotor learning depends on whether or not the action is selected in the intention-based action mode, whereas the amount of attention devoted to the action–effect is less important.

[1]  F. Waszak,et al.  Effect anticipation modulates deviance processing in the brain , 2007, Brain Research.

[2]  W. Prinz.  Perception and Action Planning , 1997 .

[3]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[4]  J Hoffmann,et al.  Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in serial reaction time tasks. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[5]  B. Hommel,et al.  Effect anticipation and action control. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  B. Hommel.  The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation , 2000 .

[7]  D. Pandya,et al.  Supplementary motor area structure and function: Review and hypotheses , 1985 .

[8]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  The impact of anticipated action effects on action planning. , 2002, Acta psychologica.

[9]  S. Tipper,et al.  Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[10]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: with special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. , 1970, Psychological review.

[11]  L. Deecke,et al.  The Preparation and Execution of Self-Initiated and Externally-Triggered Movement: A Study of Event-Related fMRI , 2002, NeuroImage.

[12]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  The role of the preSMA and the rostral cingulate zone in internally selected actions , 2007, NeuroImage.

[13]  D. Spalding.  The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.

[14]  B. Hommel,et al.  Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning , 2004, Psychological research.

[15]  G. Aschersleben,et al.  Intention-based and stimulus-based mechanisms in action selection , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[16]  R. Rescorla,et al.  A theory of Pavlovian conditioning : Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement , 1972 .

[17]  B. Hommel,et al.  The costs and benefits of cross-task priming , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[18]  B. Hommel,et al.  Acquisition and generalization of action effects , 2003 .

[19]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Two Modes of Sensorimotor Integration in Intention-Based and Stimulus-Based Actions , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.