Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In a serial reaction time task, participants practiced a repeating sequence with 1 hand. In interleaved blocks, they responded to random sequences with the other hand. Experiment 1 was composed of 5 sessions, each consisting of 30 blocks. Intermanual transfer, reflecting a hand-independent component of sequence knowledge, increased across session. A smaller but significant, nontransferable, and hand-specific component was evident in each session and did not increase with practice. Experiment 2 comprised only 1 session. Uninterrupted practice (no interleaved random blocks) improved hand-independent sequence learning in comparison with interrupted practice (as implemented in Experiment 1), whereas hand-specific sequence learning was unaffected by this between-subjects manipulation. These findings suggest separate mechanisms for effector-independent sequence learning and effector-specific acquisition of optimized response coarticulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berner et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: