Literature DB >> 26042504

Transferability of Training Benefits Differs across Neural Events: Evidence from ERPs.

Kelly G Garner1, Natasha Matthews1, Roger W Remington1, Paul E Dux1.   

Abstract

Humans can show striking capacity limitations in sensorimotor processing. Fortunately, these limitations can be attenuated with training. However, less fortunately, training benefits often remain limited to trained tasks. Recent behavioral observations suggest that the extent to which training transfers may depend on the specific stage of information processing that is being executed. Training benefits for a task that taps the consolidation of sensory information (sensory encoding) transfer to new stimulus-response mappings, whereas benefits for selecting an appropriate action (decision-making/response selection) remain specific to the trained mappings. Therefore, training may have dissociable influences on the neural events underlying subsequent sensorimotor processing stages. Here, we used EEG to investigate this possibility. In a pretraining baseline session, participants completed two four-alternative-choice response time tasks, presented both as a single task and as part of a dual task (with another task). The training group completed a further 3,000 training trials on one of the four-alternative-choice tasks. Hence, one task became trained, whereas the other remained untrained. At test, a negative-going component that is sensitive to sensory-encoding demands (N2) showed increased amplitudes and reduced latencies for trained and untrained mappings relative to a no-train control group. In contrast, the onset of the stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential, a component that reflects the activation of motor plans, was reduced only for tasks that employed trained stimulus-response mappings, relative to untrained stimulus-response mappings and controls. Collectively, these results show that training benefits are dissociable for the brain events that reflect distinct sensorimotor processing stages.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26042504     DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00833

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  4 in total

1.  "To Name or Not to Name: That is the Question": The Role of Response Inhibition in Reading.

Authors:  Jacqueline Cummine; Daniel Aalto; Amberley Ostevik; Kulpreet Cheema; William Hodgetts
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2018-10

2.  Neural and Behavioral Correlates of Attentional Inhibition Training and Perceptual Discrimination Training in a Visual Flanker Task.

Authors:  Robert D Melara; Shalini Singh; Denise A Hien
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 3.169

3.  Preference of harmonic loudness degree on piano timbre.

Authors:  Yuxiang Cai; Yushi Ling; Guikang Cao; Xuefeng Zhou
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-29

4.  Cognitive Capacity Limits Are Remediated by Practice-Induced Plasticity between the Putamen and Pre-Supplementary Motor Area.

Authors:  K G Garner; M I Garrido; P E Dux
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2020-08-28
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.