Inhibition of Eye Movements Disrupts Spatial Sequence Learning
Abstract
Abstract. Implicit sequence learning is an integral part of human experience, yet the nature of the mechanisms underlying this type of learning remains a matter of debate. In the current study, we provide a test for two accounts of implicit sequence learning, that is, one that highlights sequence learning in the absence of any motor responses (with suppressed eye movements) and one that highlights the relative contribution of the motor processes (i.e., eye movements) to learning. To adjudicate between these accounts and determine whether a motor response is a requisite process in sequence learning, we used anticipation measures to compare performance on the standard oculomotor serial reaction time (SRT) task and on a version of the SRT task where the eye movements were restricted during the learning phase. our results demonstrated an increased proportion of correct anticipations in the standard SRT task compared to the restricted-movement task.
References
(2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
(2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1), 1–28. 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
(1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120(3), 235–253. 10.1037/0096-3445.120.3.235
(1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(1), 17–30. 10.1037/0278-7393.16.1.17
(2012). Visuospatial perceptual sequence learning and eye movements. Experimental Psychology, 59(5), 279–285. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000155
(2012). Prediction during statistical learning, and implications for the implicit/explicit divide. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 8(2), 196–209. 10.5709/acp-0115-z
(2013). Implicit visual learning and the expression of learning. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(1), 82–98. 10.1016/j.concog.2012.11.003
(1992). Serial pattern learning by event observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 1029–1039. 10.1037/0278-7393.18.5.1029
(2008). Short article: Sequence learning at optimal stimulus–response mapping: Evidence from a serial reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(2), 203–209. 10.1080/17470210701557555
(2020). Implicit perceptual learning of visual-auditory modality sequences. Acta Psychologica, 202, 102979. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102979
(2000). The role of stimulus-based and response-based spatial information in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(4), 863–882. 10.1037/0278-7393.26.4.863
(2014). Incidental sequence learning in a motion coherence discrimination task: How response learning affects perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 1963–1977. 10.1037/a0037315
(2021). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.6.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans
(2006). Oculomotor evidence of sequence learning on the serial reaction time task. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 420–432. 10.3758/bf03193419
(2012). OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. 10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7
(2021a). Working memory affects anticipatory behavior during implicit pattern learning. Psychological Research, 85(1), 291–301. 10.1007/s00426-019-01251-w
(2021b). Research data supporting the publication “Inhibition of eye movements disrupts spatial sequence learning”. University of Birmingham. 10.25500/edata.bham.00000697
(1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 1–32. 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90002-8
. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
(2011). Pure perceptual-based learning of second-, third-, and fourth-order sequential probabilities. Psychological Research, 75(4), 307–323. 10.1007/s00426-010-0309-0
(1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274(5294), 1926–1928. 10.1126/science.274.5294.1926
(2012). Generalized lessons about sequence learning from the study of the serial reaction time task. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 8(2), 165–178. 10.5709/acp-0113-1
(1989). On learning complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(6), 1061–1069. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0278-7393.15.6.1061
(1998). Handbook of implicit learning. Sage Publications.
(2011). Peripheral vision and pattern recognition: A review. Journal of Vision, 11(5), 13. 10.1167/11.5.13
(2020). How sequence learning unfolds: Insights from anticipatory eye movements. Cognition, 201, 104291. 10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104291
(2013). What is the best fixation target? The effect of target shape on stability of fixational eye movements. Vision Research, 76, 31–42. 10.1016/j.visres.2012.10.012
(2009). Neural evidence of statistical learning: Efficient detection of visual regularities without awareness. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(10), 1934–1945. 10.1162/jocn.2009.21131
(2017). Anticipation measures of sequence learning: Manual versus oculomotor versions of the serial reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(3), 579–589. 10.1080/17470218.2016.1172095
(2021). Implicit sequence learning in individuals with Parkinson's disease: The added value of using an ocular version of the serial reaction time (O-SRT) task. Brain and Cognition, 147, 105654. 10.1016/j.bandc.2020.105654
(2004). Intentional control and implicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 354–369. 10.1037/0278-7393.30.2.354
(1999). Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Memory & Cognition, 27(3), 561–572. 10.3758/bf03211549
