acquisition & retention of basic components of skill
DESCRIPTION
Acquisition & Retention of Basic Components of Skill. Robert W. Proctor Motonori Yamaguchi Purdue University. Training Knowledge and Skills for the Networked Battlefield. Army Research Office Grant W9112NF-05-1-0153. Acquisition and Retention of Basic Components of Skills. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Acquisition & Retention of Basic Components of Skill
Robert W. ProctorMotonori Yamaguchi
Purdue University
Army Research Office Grant W9112NF-05-1-0153
Training Knowledge and Skills for the Networked Battlefield
“The most distinguishing characteristic of (the future force) will be the interconnectivity of information systems.”
(Gen. Byrnes, 2004, at the Army National Guard Senior Commanders’ conference)
“The application of information technology can enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the processes involved in warfighting … Investing in IT systems to enable warfighting is therefore logical and necessary.”
(Col. Costigan, March 2004,TRADOC News Service)
Acquisition and Retention of Basic Components of Skills
Acquisition and Retention of Basic Components of Skills
“The biggest source of confusion in man-machine communication arises when the brain has to translate and interpret information.” – Paul Fitts
Our research has focused on tasks involving response-selection skills
Phenomena we studied were stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effects
Acquisition and Retention of Basic Components of Skills
I. Transfer of newly acquired associationsProctor, Yamaguchi, & Vu (in press). JEP:
LMC
II. Training with mixed mappings and tasksYamaguchi & Proctor (in press).
JEP:Applied
III. Performance of multiple tasksShin & Proctor (submitted).
I. Transfer of Newly Acquired Associations
The new procedures acquired from training can affect performance when transferred to a different task or environment.
Our experiments have examined transfer that occurs when the acquired procedures are no longer relevant.
Influence of a Prior Incompatible Location Mapping on the Simon Effect Practice with an incompatible mapping and
transfer to a pure Simon task (for which stimulus location is irrelevant)
Practice Session Transfer Session
Green Red
Influence of a Prior Incompatible Location Mapping on the Simon Effect Previous Studies
With visual stimuli, as little as 84 trials of practice with an incompatible spatial mapping eliminates the Simon effect after a delay of:
5 minutes—The Simon effect reversed (-9 ms) One week—The Simon effect reversed (-21 ms)
With auditory stimuli, no transfer of incompatible spatial mapping
Simon effect not reduced Why?
Design
Transfer session: Auditory Simon task
Practice session: Incompatible mapping of left-right auditory stimuli to left-right keypresses Varied amount of practice: 0 (control), 84, 300, or
600 trials
Transfer of Prior Association for Auditory Stimuli: Amount of Practice
0
20
40
60
control 84 300 600
Amount of Practice
Transfer of incompatible spatial mapping occurred with more practice
Weaker transfer effect than for visual Simon tasks (Vu et al., 2003)
Acquisition of stronger (more automatic?) associations needed.
Transfer of Prior Association for Auditory Stimuli: Amount of Practice
Green Red
Green
Red
Practice dimension Transfer dimension
Generalization Across Spatial Dimension (Visual Stimuli)
Vu (2006): Visual Stimuli
No transfer across dimensions with 84 trials of practice
Transfer across dimensions with 600 trials of practice
Interpretation: With sufficient practice, a “respond opposite” procedure is acquired
Generalization Across Spatial Dimension (Auditory Stimuli)
Practice session (600 trials):
a) Horizontal [white noise]
b) Vertical [white noise]
Transfer session:
a) Horizontal Simon task [rapid/slow noise]
b) Vertical Simon task [rapid/slow noise]
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
Control H V Control H V
Generalization Across Spatial Dimension (Auditory Stimuli)
H = Horizontal practice; V = Vertical practice
Horizontal Transfer Vertical Transfer
Generalization Across Spatial Dimension (Auditory Stimuli)
Generalization of prior incompatible association did not occur across spatial dimensions for auditory stimuli.
No evidence for acquisition of a general “respond opposite” procedure with an incompatible auditory S-R mapping.
Summary: Transfer of Newly Acquired Associations
Visual Transfer Tasks: Generalization of prior association occurred across
spatial dimensions after 600 practice trials Rule-like procedure is acquired during practice
Auditory Transfer Tasks: More practice is required for transfer of prior
association within a spatial dimension Stronger tendency of responding with natural
association Generalization of prior mapping did not occur across
spatial dimensions
Plan: Transfer of Newly Acquired Associations Development of automaticity:
Dual-task practice (coupled with an attention demanding secondary task)
General rule acquisition: Practice with variable stimuli (training difficulty
hypothesis) Transfer across different manual operations
Perceptual, motoric, or more abstract procedural transfer?
II. Training with Mixed Mappings and Tasks
Effects of having to maintain multiple associations concurrently
Mixed compatible and incompatible mappings: Longer RT overall (mixing cost) Benefit for compatible mapping largely
eliminated Does this finding generalize to a
simulated environment?
Mixed Mappings and Tasks (Flight Task)
Task: While flying, squares appear on the top right or
top left of the screen Green square: Turn yoke in that direction Red square: Turn yoke in opposite direction Display: Horizon-move vs. Pointer-move
Four trial blocks Pure compatible Pure incompatible Mixed compatible and incompatible (2 blocks)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Horizon-move Pointer-move
Pure
Mix
Mixed Mappings and Tasks (Flight Task)
Mixed Mappings and Tasks (Non-Flight Task)
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Yoke-turn Button-press
Pure
Mix
Mixed Mappings and Tasks (Non-Flight Task)
Summary:Mixed Mappings and Tasks SRC effect reduced but not eliminated in flight
tasks The effect was also reduced for yoke-turn
responses, but was eliminated for button-presses, in non-flight tasks
SRC effects with mixed mappings depend on response mode Different response preparation processes? If so, how does practice affect response
preparation?
Plan:Mixed Mappings and Tasks Response mode:
What factors of response mode result in differential effects with mixed mappings?
Effect of practice on response preparation: If preparatory process is responsible, what
type of practice alters the process and how? Generalized rule acquisition:
Practice with mixed mappings enables generalized rule acquisition?
Training difficulty or training specificity?
Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) effect“Slower responding to the second of the two stimuli when the interval between them is short” Usually attributed to a response-selection bottleneck
Ideomotor Compatibility“Stimulus and response are ideomotor compatible when the sensory effect of the stimulus is similar to that of response.”
e.g.) Repeating a word that is heard
III. Performance of Multiple Tasks
III. Performance of Multiple Tasks
Do ideomotor compatible tasks allow bypass of the response-selection bottleneck? Greenwald and Shulman (1973): Yes. Lien, Proctor, & Allen (2002): No.
Are the tasks used in prior studies really ideomotor compatible? Saying the name of a spoken letter Moving joystick left or right (or pressing left or
right key) to spatially positioned arrow
Performance of Multiple Tasks
Two experiments varying set size for visual manual task Experiment 1:
Joystick movements
Experiment 2: Keypresses
↑
→←
↓
Performance of Multiple Tasks
Across 4 “sessions” of 48 trial blocks, the PRP effect increased in size Decrease in RT for auditory-vocal task was
larger at long interval between two stimuli Even with practice, these tasks still show PRP
effects Visual-manual tasks are not ideomotor
compatible RT for the visual-motor tasks was longer with
4 alternatives than with 2 PRP effect for auditory-vocal task was larger
Summary: Factors Affecting Response-Selection Process Transfer experiments:
Differential effects of stimulus modalities (visual vs. auditory)
Spatial dimension (horizontal vs. vertical) Stimulus similarity
Mixed mapping tasks: Pure vs. mixed presentation (mixing cost) Response mode (yoke vs. button)
Summary: Factors Affecting Response-Selection Process Dual-task experiments:
Psychological refractory period Response-selection bottleneck
Manual response alternatives Set-size effects for visual-manual task Not ideomotor compatible
Issue of why PRP effect increases with practice for these task combinations but decreases for others
Research Plans
Integration with Other Work
Training Principles (e.g., specificity of training; procedural reinstatement; training difficulty hypothesis)
Predictive Modeling using ACT-R and other models
Auditory/visual practice Auditory Simon tasks
Practice trialsPractice Stimuli
Auditory Visual
Control (0) 42
84 47 48
300 17 51
600 18 43
1,200 - 37
Horizontal/vertical practice Horizontal/vertical transfer
Practice Dimension
Transfer Dimension
Horizontal Vertical
Horizontal -18 -9
Vertical 2 -1
*Results of Vu (2006)
*Values in parentheses are the Simon effect after 1,200 trials of practice
Horizontal/vertical practice Horizontal/vertical transfer
Practice Dimension
Transfer Dimension [stimuli]
Horizontal [tone]
Horizontal [noise]
Vertical [noise]
Control
(no practice)39 41 34
Horizontal 20 -20 11 (42)
Vertical 55 36 (42) -7
Pure Mixed
Horizon-move
82* 57*
Pointer-move 91* 41*
Results of Exp 1-2
* denotes significant effect at .05
Pure Mixed
Yoke-turn 49* 32*
Button-press 57* -10
Results of Exp 3-4
* denotes significant effect at .05
Sequential Effects on SRC Effects
Pure Repeat Alternate
Horizon-move 82 72 44
Pointer-move 91 65 18
Yoke-turn 49 48 16
Button-press 57 -4 -13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
82 300 600 Control 82 300 600 1200
Auditory PracticeVisual Practice
Generalization Across Stimulus Modalities: Amount of Practice (delete
the visual practice)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Control H V Control H V Control H V
Practice Dimension
H = Horizontal practice; V = Vertical practice
Horizontal (tone) Transfer
Vertical (noise) TransferHorizontal (noise)
Transfer
Generalization Across Spatial Dimension (Auditory Stimuli) (Delete horizontal
tone)
Sequential Effects on SRC Effects
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Pure RepeatAlternate Pure RepeatAlternate Pure RepeatAlternate Pure RepeatAlternate
Horizon-move
Pointer-move
Yoke-turn
Button-press
P R A P R A
P = Pure R = Repeat A = Alternate
P R A P R A