Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The purpose of these experiments was to investigate further the variable practice effect found by Shea and Kohl (1990). Experiment 1 was an initial attempt to determine the locus of the retention benefits demonstrated by subjects provided variable practice experiences. All groups received 20 acquisition blocks consisting of five test trials per block at a target of 150 N. The interval between test trials was either unfilled or filled, with additional trials consisting of the same target force, variable target forces, or practice on an unrelated motor task. The results indicated retention was not incremented (relative to an unfilled interval) by requiring subjects to perform an unrelated motor task in the intertest-trial interval. However, when the interest-trial interval was filled with practice on related motor tasks, retention was significantly improved. Experiment 2 assessed the impact of increasing the number of related motor tasks interpolated between test trials. The results indicated filling the intertest-trial interval with one motor task resulted in large retention benefits relative to an unfilled interval. Further increases in the number of related motor tasks (3) interpolated between test trials resulted in only modest increments to retention. The results were consistent with the elaboration perspective proposed by Shea and Zimny (1983). The elaboration perspective proposes that the simultaneous presence of related items in working memory facilitates interitem elaborative and distinctive processing that ultimately results in retention benefits.
Shea et al. (Sat,) studied this question.