Learning a new human-computer alphabet: the role of similarity and practice.

Two purposes motivated this study: (a) to quantify the difficulty in learning various symbols of the alphabet used to enter data into a personal digital assistant (PDA), and (b) to investigate the interaction of item difficulty with practice conditions that promote varying levels of cognitive effort. Levels of compatibility between members of the PDA alphabet and English were quantified through introspective ratings in Experiment 1 and objective performance measures in Experiment 2. Three levels of item compatibility were learned under conditions of proactive or retroactive augmented information in Experiment 3. Contrary to expectations, the item similarity effect did not interact with practice schedules--a retroactive augmented information condition resulted in degraded levels of acquisition performance, but superior retention levels, compared to the proactive condition. These findings are discussed in terms of the relative merits of cognitive effort in skill acquisition.

[1]  R. Bjork.  Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. , 1994 .

[2]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[3]  B. Thon,et al.  Differential effects of task complexity on contextual interference in a drawing task. , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[4]  Stephan P. Swinnen,et al.  Cognitive Effort and Motor Learning , 1994 .

[5]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  The effects of proactive and retroactive demonstrations on learning signed letters , 1999 .

[6]  A. Osman,et al.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.

[7]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to thier development and use , 1989 .

[8]  R. Bjork.  Retrieval inhibition as an adaptive mechanism in human memory. , 1989 .

[9]  A. D. Groot,et al.  What Is Hard To Learn Is Easy To Forget: The Roles of Word Concreteness, Cognate Status, and Word Frequency in Foreign Language Vocabulary Learning and Forgetting. , 2000 .

[10]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Retrieval practice and the maintenance of knowledge. , 1988 .

[11]  Barry H. Kantowitz,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility and Human Factors , 1990 .

[12]  David A. Rosenbaum,et al.  Development of a method for measuring movement-related effort , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  Vivian I. Schneider,et al.  What Is Learned under Difficult Conditions Is Hard to Forget: Contextual Interference Effects in Foreign Vocabulary Acquisition, Retention, and Transfer , 2002 .

[14]  E. A. Alluisi,et al.  Things That Go Together: A Review of Stimulus-Response Compatibility and Related Effects , 1990 .

[15]  Michael C. Anderson,et al.  Remembering can cause forgetting: retrieval dynamics in long-term memory. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  M. Guadagnoli,et al.  Challenge Point: A Framework for Conceptualizing the Effects of Various Practice Conditions in Motor Learning , 2004, Journal of motor behavior.

[17]  D. Weeks,et al.  A comparison of imitation strategies in observational learning of action patterns. , 1996, Journal of motor behavior.

[18]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[19]  G. C. Grindley,et al.  THE EFFECT OF KNOWLEDGE OF RESULTS ON LEARNING AND PERFORMANCE: I. A CO-ORDINATED MOVEMENT OF THE TWO HANDS , 1938 .

[20]  L. Rajmil.  Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use, 3rd ed , 2005 .

[21]  S. Kornblum,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  W. Pyle.  Transfer and interference in card-distributing. , .

[23]  M. Washburn,et al.  Minor studies from the psychological laboratory of Vassar College: The effect of the interval between repetitions on the speed of learning a series of movements. , 1913 .

[24]  S. Kornblum.  Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. , 1992 .

[25]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Processing in Human Memory , 1979 .

[26]  P. Fitts,et al.  S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[27]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  Schema Theory: Critical Review and Implications for the Role of Cognition in a New Theory of Motor Learning , 2003, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[28]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Metacognition : knowing about knowing , 1994 .

[29]  Stephan P. Swinnen,et al.  Interpolated Activities During the Knowledge-of-Results Delay and Post-Knowledge-of-Results Interval: Effects on Performance and Learning , 1990 .

[30]  J. Shea,et al.  Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. , 1979 .

[31]  Larry B. Wallnau,et al.  Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 1985 .

[32]  Mark S. Sanders,et al.  Human Factors in Engineering and Design , 2016 .

[33]  C. Shea,et al.  Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[34]  P. E. Morris,et al.  Practical aspects of memory , 1980 .

[35]  Ray Eberts,et al.  The Mental Model in Stimulus-Response Compatibility , 1990 .