Stimulus presentation rates affect performance but not the acquired knowledge – Evidence from procedural learning

Abstract

Presentation rates -the tempo in which we encounter subsequent items -can alter both our behavioral and neural responses in cognitive domains such as learning, memory, decisionmaking, perception and language. However, it is still unclear to what extent presentation rates affect the momentary performance versus the underlying cognitive function or mentalrepresentation. Here we systemically tested the effect of presentation rate on performance versus competence in procedural learning -a fundamental cognitive function that underlies the acquisition of skills and habits. Procedural learning was assessed by a probabilistic sequence learning task, in which learning typically occurs implicitly. Stimulus presentation rates were systematically manipulated by the Response-to-Stimulus-Intervals (RSIs). Participants were assigned to a fast (120ms) RSI or a slow (850ms) RSI group during the Learning phase, and were tested with both RSIs 24 hours later (Testing phase). We also tested whether they gained explicit knowledge about the sequence or their knowledge remained implicit. We found that the slower RSI led to weaker performance in the Learning phase. Importantly, however, the results of the Testing phase showed that this effect was primarily due to the expression of the acquired knowledge and not the learning itself. Thus, the slower presentation rate affected performance rather than competence. The acquired knowledge remained implicit in both groups, regardless of the presentation rate during learning. These findings call for tasks that can dissociate competence from performance both in experimental and clinical settings. Additionally, our findings can help design more efficient training protocols in education and clinical rehabilitation.

Retrieval of a well-established skill is resistant to distraction: evidence from an implicit probabilistic sequence learning task

“…Moreover, the lack of differences persisted even after the normalization of the baseline scores. The fact that the sequence knowledge was comparable to the single-task group in both phases (in the dual-task blocks and in the inserted probe blocks) indicates that the secondary task affected neither the performance nor the competence of the primary task (Kiss, Nemeth, & Janacsek, 2019;Vekony et al, 2019). These results are also in harmony with previous research that found intact implicit sequence knowledge after practicing the primary task in single-task conditions (Frensch et al, 1998;Shanks & Channon, 2002).…”

Retrieval of a well-established skill is resistant to distraction: Evidence from an implicit probabilistic sequence learning task

“…Moreover, the lack of differences persisted even after controlling for the differences in baseline reaction times. The fact that the probabilistic sequence knowledge of the dual-task group was comparable to that of the single-task group both in the dual-task blocks (performance) and in the intermittent control blocks (competence) indicates that the secondary task did not affect the performance or the competence of the primary task [ 35 , 58 ].…”

Divided attention does not affect the acquisition and consolidation of transitional probabilities

“…Following the standard analysis and interpretation of the task outlined in previous studies 34 , 36 , 61 , incidental use of knowledge (i.e., without intentional access to their knowledge) is sufficient to achieve good performance (that is, producing high-probability triplets above chance level) in the Inclusion condition. In contrast, good performance in the Exclusion condition (that is, producing high-probability triplets at or below chance level) requires intentionally accessible knowledge to exert control over their responses and generate a series of responses that is indeed different from what they practiced (i.e., intentionally exclude the acquired knowledge).…”