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