Comparison of Motor Skill Acquisition according to Types of Sensory-Stimuli Cue in Serial Reaction Time Task

  • Kwon, Yong Hyun (Department of Physical Therapy, Yeungnam University College) ;
  • Lee, Myoung Hee (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Science, Kyungsung University)
  • Received : 2014.05.19
  • Accepted : 2014.06.13
  • Published : 2014.06.25


Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether types of sensory-stimuli cues in terms of visual, auditory, and visuoauditory cues can be affected to motor sequential learning in healthy adults, using serial reaction time task. Methods: Twenty four healthy subjects participated in this study, who were randomly allocated into three groups, in terms of visual-stimuli (VS) group, auditory-stimuli (AS) group, and visuoauditory-stimuli (VAS) group. In SRT task, eight Arabic numbers were adopted as presentational stimulus, which were composed of three different types of presentational modules, in terms of visual, auditory, and visuoauditory stimuli. On an experiment, all subjects performed total 3 sessions relevant to each stimulus module with a pause of 10 minutes for training and pre-/post-tests. At the pre- and post-tests, reaction time and accuracy were calculated. Results: In reaction time, significant differences were founded in terms of between-subjects, within-subjects, and interaction effect for group ${\times}$ repeated factor. In accuracy, no significant differences were observed in between-group and interaction effect for groups ${\times}$ repeated factor. However, a significant main effect of within-subjects was observed. In addition, a significant difference was showed in comparison of differences of changes between the pre- and post-test only in the reaction time among three groups. Conclusion: This study suggest that short-term sequential motor training on one day induced behavioral modification, such as speed and accuracy of motor response. In addition, we found that motor training using visual-stimuli cue showed better effect of motor skill acquisition, compared to auditory and visuoauditory-stimuli cues.


  1. Schmidt RA. Motor control and learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetis Publishers; 2005.
  2. Wolpert DM, Ghahramani Z, Flanagan JR. Perspectives and problems in motor learning. Trends Cogn Sci. 2001;5(11):487-94.
  3. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor learning and performance; from principle to application. Human Kinetics; 2014.
  4. Connelly DM, Carnahan H, Vandervoort AA. Motor skill learning of concentric and eccentric isokinetic movements in older adults. Exp Aging Res. 2000;26(3):209-28.
  5. Robertson EM. The serial reaction time task: Implicit motor skill learning? J Neurosci. 2007;27(38):10073-5.
  6. Shemmell J, Forner M, Tathem B et al. Neuromuscular-skeletal constraints on the acquisition of skill in a discrete torque production task. Exp Brain Res. 2006;175(3):400-10.
  7. Kim SH, Pohl PS, Luchies CW et al. Ipsilateral deficits of targeted movements after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(5):719-24.
  8. Nissen MJ, Bullemer P. Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognit Psychol. 1987;19(1):191-32.
  9. Moisello C, Crupi D, Tunik E et al. The serial reaction time task revisited: A study on motor sequence learning with an armreaching task. Exp Brain Res. 2009;194(1):143-55.
  10. Song S, Howard JH Jr, Howard DV. Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task. Exp Brain Res. 2008;189(2):145-58.
  11. Kwon YH, Chang JS, Kim CS. Changes of cortical activation pattern induced by motor learning with serial reaction time task. The Korean Society of Physcial Therapy. 2009;21(1):65-72.
  12. Kwon YH, Chang JS, Lee MH et al. The evidence of neuromuscular adaptation according to motor sequential learning in the serial reaction time task. J Phys Ther Sci. 2010;22(2):117-21.
  13. Kwon YH, Nam KS, Park JW. Identification of cortical activation and white matter architecture according to short-term motor learning in the human brain: Functional mri and diffusion tensor tractography study. Neurosci Lett. 2012;520(1):11-5.
  14. Park MC, Bae SS, Lee MY. Change of activation of the supplementary motor area in motor learning: An fmri case study. The Journal of Korean Society of Physical Therapy. 2011;23(2):85-90.
  15. Jonsdottir J, Cattaneo D, Recalcati M et al. Task-oriented biofeedback to improve gait in individuals with chronic stroke: Motor learning approach. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(5):478-85.
  16. Fairbrother JT, Laughlin DD, Nguyen TV. Self-controlled feedback facilitates motor learning in both high and low activity individuals. Front Psychol. 2012;3:323-30.
  17. Lauber B, Keller M. Improving motor performance: Selected aspects of augmented feedback in exercise and health. Eur J Sport Sci. 2014;14(1):36-43.
  18. Sigrist R, Rauter G, Riener R et al. Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013;20(1):21-53.
  19. Yen SC, Landry JM, Wu M. Augmented multisensory feedback enhances locomotor adaptation in humans with incomplete spinal cord injury. Hum Mov Sci. 2014
  20. Lee MH, Kim MC, Park JT. Analysis of motor performance and p300 during serial task performance according to the type of cue. Journal of the Korean Society of Physical Medine. 2013;8(2):281-7.
  21. Adler S, Beckers D, Buck M. Pnf in practice: An illustrated guide. Springer; 2013.
  22. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;9(1):97-113.
  23. Labeye E, Oker A, Badard G et al. Activation and integration of motor components in a short-term priming paradigm. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2008;129(1):108-11.
  24. Tang K, Staines WR, Black SE et al. Novel vibrotactile discrimination task for investigating the neural correlates of short-term learning with fmri. J Neurosci Methods. 2009;178(1):65-74.
  25. Todorov E, Shadmehr R, Bizzi E. Augmented feedback presented in a virtual environment accelerates learning of a difficult motor task. J Mot Behav. 1997;29(2):147-58.
  26. Wulf G, Horger M, Shea CH. Benefits of blocked over serial feedback on complex motor skill learning. J Mot Behav. 1999;31(1):95-103.
  27. Akamatsu T, Fukuyama H, Kawamata T. The effects of visual, auditory, and mixed cues on choice reaction in parkinson's disease. J Neurol Sci. 2008;269(1-2):118-25.
  28. Camachon C, Jacobs DM, Huet M et al. The role of concurrent feedback in learning to walk through sliding doors. Ecological psychology. Ecological Psychology. 2007;19(4):367-82.
  29. Huet M, Camachon C, Fernandez L et al. Self-controlled concurrent feedback and the education of attention towards perceptual invariants. Hum Mov Sci. 2009;28(4):450-67.
  30. Wulf G, Shea CH. Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychon Bull Rev. 2002;9(2):185-211.
  31. Suteerawattananon M, Morris GS, Etnyre BR et al. Effects of visual and auditory cues on gait in individuals with parkinson's disease. J Neurol Sci. 2004;219(1-2):63-9.
  32. Leonard CT. The neuroscience of human movement. Mosby; 1998.