Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks.

Previous research has demonstrated that subjects' responses in a speeded-choice task are affected by the sequence of stimuli and responses. Generally, responses are faster when the same stimulus is repeated. There is disagreement in the literature concerning whether or not this effect represents a speedup of perception, response execution, or central stages of processing. The first 5 experiments reported here demonstrate that the effect is quite stimulus specific: A succession of different stimuli that call for the same response produces little repetition benefit, unless the stimuli differ only in very superficial ways (e.g., in color). Increasing the intertrial interval from 100 ms to 1000 ms attenuates these repetition effects only slightly. These results would be consistent with a perceptual locus for the repetition effect, but Experiment 6 shows that if the response mapping changes from trial to trial, the advantage for stimulus repetitions is abolished The results indicate that locus of the repetition effect is at the stage of response selection. However, the stimulus specificity of the effects indicates that immediate repetitions produce or strengthen transient links that "shortcut" the response-selection stage. By contrast, the results of Pashler and Baylis (1991) indicate that practice primarily strengthens response selection at the categorical level rather than shortcutting it One implication of the results is that the practice effect is not created simply by the accumulation of the traces responsible for repetition effects.

[1]  G. Logan Toward an instance theory of automatization. , 1988 .

[2]  P. Bertelson,et al.  Serial Choice Reaction-time as a Function of Response versus Signal-and-Response Repetition , 1965, Nature.

[3]  P M Rabbitt,et al.  Repetition Effects and Signal Classification Strategies in Serial Choice-Response Tasks , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  J G Ells,et al.  Serial reaction time as a function of the nature of repeated events. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  Randall S. Hansen,et al.  The effects of stimulus sequence and probability on perceptual processing , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[7]  W. R. Garner The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

[8]  S. Dornič,et al.  Attention and performance V , 1976 .

[9]  J. Brožek Attention and Performance II. , 1971 .

[10]  H. Pashler,et al.  Procedural learning. I, Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks , 1991 .

[11]  J. Sachs Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse , 1967 .

[12]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Pro-cessing: A Framework for Memory Research , 1975 .

[13]  M C Smith,et al.  Repetition effect and short-term memory. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  H. Pashler,et al.  Procedural Learning : 1 . Locus of Practice Effects in Speeded Choice Tasks , 1991 .

[15]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Memory and cognition , 1977 .

[16]  D. Hale Sequential Effects in a Two-Choice Serial Reaction Task , 1967, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  S. Kornblum,et al.  Sequential determinants of information processing in serial and discrete choice reaction time. , 1969 .

[18]  A. T. Welford,et al.  Skilled performance : perceptual and motor skills , 1976 .

[19]  Don L. Scarborough,et al.  Accessing lexical memory: The transfer of word repetition effects across task and modality , 1979 .

[20]  Saul Sternberg,et al.  The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method , 1969 .

[21]  I. Biederman,et al.  Stimulus probability and stimulus set size in memory scanning. , 1974 .

[22]  P. Bertelson S-R relationships and reaction times to new versus repeated signals in a serial task , 1963 .

[23]  P. A. Kolers Reading a Year Later. , 1976 .