Learning in sensorimotor adaptation tasks has been historically viewed as solely an implicit learning phenomenon. However, recent findings suggest that implicit adaptation is heavily constrained, calling into question its utility in motor learning, and the theoretical framework of sensorimotor adaptation paradigms. These inferences have been based mainly on results from single bouts of training, thus, it is possible that implicit adaptation processes supersede explicit compensation strategies, such as explicitly re-aiming their intended movement direction, over repeated practice sessions. We tested this by dissociating the contributions of explicit re-aiming strategies and implicit adaptation over five consecutive days of training. Implicit adaptation plateaued at a value far short of complete learning. We sought to determine if these constraints on implicit adaptation extend to another sensorimotor task, mirror reversal. Implicit adaptation was inappropriate for mirror reversal and became suppressed during training. These findings are consistent with a handful of recent studies suggesting that implicit adaptation processes, as studied in sensorimotor adaptation paradigms, cannot fully support long-term motor skill. New and NoteworthyIn this set of studies, we find that implicit adaptation cannot fully account for learning in adaptation tasks, such as the visuomotor rotation and mirror reversal tasks, even following several days of training. In fact, implicit adaptation can be counterproductive to learning. These findings question the utility of implicit adaptation processes to motor learning more broadly.

Learning in sensorimotor adaptation tasks has been viewed as an implicit learning phenomenon.The implicit process affords recalibration of existing motor skills so that the system can adjust to changes in the body or environment without relearning from scratch. However, recent findings suggest that the implicit process is heavily constrained, calling into question its utility in motor learning and the theoretical framework of sensorimotor adaptation paradigms. These inferences have been based mainly on results from single bouts of training, where explicit compensation strategies, such as explicitly re-aiming the intended movement direction, contribute a significant proportion of adaptive learning. It is possible, however, that the implicit process supersedes explicit compensation strategies over repeated practice sessions. We tested this by dissociating the contributions of explicit re-aiming strategies and the implicit process in human participants over five consecutive days of training. Despite a substantially longer duration of training, the implicit process still plateaued at a value far short of complete learning and, as has been observed in previous studies, was inappropriate for a mirror-reversal task. Notably, we find significant between subject differences that call into question traditional interpretation of these group-level results. Significance StatementIn this set of studies, we find that the implicit process cannot fully account for learning in adaptation tasks, such as the visuomotor rotation and mirror-reversal tasks, even following several days of training. In fact, the implicit process can be counterproductive to learning. Most notably, we find significant between subject differences that call into question traditional interpretation of these group-level results.

Classic taxonomies of memory distinguish explicit and implicit memory systems, placing motor skills squarely in the latter branch. This assertion is in part a consequence of foundational discoveries showing significant motor learning in amnesics. Those findings suggest that declarative memory processes in the medial temporal lobe (MTL) do not contribute to motor learning. Here, we revisit this issue, testing an individual (L. S. J.) with severe MTL damage on four motor learning tasks and comparing her performance to age-matched controls. Consistent with previous findings in amnesics, we observed that L. S. J. could improve motor performance despite having significantly impaired declarative memory. However, she tended to perform poorly relative to age-matched controls, with deficits apparently related to flexible action selection. Further supporting an action selection deficit, L. S. J. fully failed to learn a task that required the acquisition of arbitrary action–outcome associations. We thus propose a modest revision to the classic taxonomic model: Although MTL-dependent memory processes are not necessary for some motor learning to occur, they play a significant role in the acquisition, implementation, and retrieval of action selection strategies. These findings have implications for our understanding of the neural correlates of motor learning, the psychological mechanisms of skill, and the theory of multiple memory systems.