File Download
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
 
Supplementary

Article: Marginally perceptible outcome feedback, motor learning and implicit processes
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleMarginally perceptible outcome feedback, motor learning and implicit processes
 
AuthorsMasters, RSW1
Maxwell, JP1
Eves, FF2
 
KeywordsDeclarative knowledge
Hypothesis testing
Implicit [motor] learning
Outcome feedback
Subjective and objective threshold of awareness
 
Issue Date2009
 
PublisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/concog
 
CitationConsciousness And Cognition, 2009, v. 18 n. 3, p. 639-645 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.03.004
 
AbstractParticipants struck 500 golf balls to a concealed target. Outcome feedback was presented at the subjective or objective threshold of awareness of each participant or at a supraliminal threshold. Participants who received fully perceptible (supraliminal) feedback learned to strike the ball onto the target, as did participants who received feedback that was only marginally perceptible (subjective threshold). Participants who received feedback that was not perceptible (objective threshold) showed no learning. Upon transfer to a condition in which the target was unconcealed, performance increased in both the subjective and the objective threshold condition, but decreased in the supraliminal condition. In all three conditions, participants reported minimal declarative knowledge of their movements, suggesting that deliberate hypothesis testing about how best to move in order to perform the motor task successfully was disrupted by the impoverished disposition of the visual outcome feedback. It was concluded that sub-optimally perceptible visual feedback evokes implicit processes. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 
ISSN1053-8100
2013 Impact Factor: 2.235
 
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.03.004
 
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000270376100008
 
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorMasters, RSW
 
dc.contributor.authorMaxwell, JP
 
dc.contributor.authorEves, FF
 
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T09:35:58Z
 
dc.date.available2010-09-06T09:35:58Z
 
dc.date.issued2009
 
dc.description.abstractParticipants struck 500 golf balls to a concealed target. Outcome feedback was presented at the subjective or objective threshold of awareness of each participant or at a supraliminal threshold. Participants who received fully perceptible (supraliminal) feedback learned to strike the ball onto the target, as did participants who received feedback that was only marginally perceptible (subjective threshold). Participants who received feedback that was not perceptible (objective threshold) showed no learning. Upon transfer to a condition in which the target was unconcealed, performance increased in both the subjective and the objective threshold condition, but decreased in the supraliminal condition. In all three conditions, participants reported minimal declarative knowledge of their movements, suggesting that deliberate hypothesis testing about how best to move in order to perform the motor task successfully was disrupted by the impoverished disposition of the visual outcome feedback. It was concluded that sub-optimally perceptible visual feedback evokes implicit processes. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
 
dc.identifier.citationConsciousness And Cognition, 2009, v. 18 n. 3, p. 639-645 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.03.004
 
dc.identifier.citeulike5123232
 
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.03.004
 
dc.identifier.eissn1090-2376
 
dc.identifier.epage645
 
dc.identifier.hkuros163626
 
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000270376100008
 
dc.identifier.issn1053-8100
2013 Impact Factor: 2.235
 
dc.identifier.issue3
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.pmid19375946
 
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-69249208569
 
dc.identifier.spage639
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/87905
 
dc.identifier.volume18
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.publisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/concog
 
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
 
dc.relation.ispartofConsciousness and Cognition
 
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
 
dc.subject.meshAwareness
 
dc.subject.meshFeedback, Psychological
 
dc.subject.meshGolf - psychology
 
dc.subject.meshOrientation
 
dc.subject.meshPsychomotor Performance
 
dc.subjectDeclarative knowledge
 
dc.subjectHypothesis testing
 
dc.subjectImplicit [motor] learning
 
dc.subjectOutcome feedback
 
dc.subjectSubjective and objective threshold of awareness
 
dc.titleMarginally perceptible outcome feedback, motor learning and implicit processes
 
dc.typeArticle
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Masters, RSW</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Maxwell, JP</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Eves, FF</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2010-09-06T09:35:58Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2010-09-06T09:35:58Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2009</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>Consciousness And Cognition, 2009, v. 18 n. 3, p. 639-645</identifier.citation>
<identifier.issn>1053-8100</identifier.issn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/87905</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>Participants struck 500 golf balls to a concealed target. Outcome feedback was presented at the subjective or objective threshold of awareness of each participant or at a supraliminal threshold. Participants who received fully perceptible (supraliminal) feedback learned to strike the ball onto the target, as did participants who received feedback that was only marginally perceptible (subjective threshold). Participants who received feedback that was not perceptible (objective threshold) showed no learning. Upon transfer to a condition in which the target was unconcealed, performance increased in both the subjective and the objective threshold condition, but decreased in the supraliminal condition. In all three conditions, participants reported minimal declarative knowledge of their movements, suggesting that deliberate hypothesis testing about how best to move in order to perform the motor task successfully was disrupted by the impoverished disposition of the visual outcome feedback. It was concluded that sub-optimally perceptible visual feedback evokes implicit processes. &#169; 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<publisher>Academic Press. The Journal&apos;s web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/concog</publisher>
<relation.ispartof>Consciousness and Cognition</relation.ispartof>
<subject>Declarative knowledge</subject>
<subject>Hypothesis testing</subject>
<subject>Implicit [motor] learning</subject>
<subject>Outcome feedback</subject>
<subject>Subjective and objective threshold of awareness</subject>
<subject.mesh>Awareness</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Feedback, Psychological</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Golf - psychology</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Orientation</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Psychomotor Performance</subject.mesh>
<title>Marginally perceptible outcome feedback, motor learning and implicit processes</title>
<type>Article</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=1053-8100&amp;volume=18&amp;issue=3&amp;spage=639&amp;epage=645&amp;date=2009&amp;atitle=Marginally+perceptible+outcome+feedback,+motor+learning+and+implicit+processes</identifier.openurl>
<description.nature>Link_to_subscribed_fulltext</description.nature>
<identifier.doi>10.1016/j.concog.2009.03.004</identifier.doi>
<identifier.pmid>19375946</identifier.pmid>
<identifier.scopus>eid_2-s2.0-69249208569</identifier.scopus>
<identifier.hkuros>163626</identifier.hkuros>
<relation.references>http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-69249208569&amp;selection=ref&amp;src=s&amp;origin=recordpage</relation.references>
<identifier.volume>18</identifier.volume>
<identifier.issue>3</identifier.issue>
<identifier.spage>639</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>645</identifier.epage>
<identifier.eissn>1090-2376</identifier.eissn>
<identifier.isi>WOS:000270376100008</identifier.isi>
<publisher.place>United States</publisher.place>
<identifier.citeulike>5123232</identifier.citeulike>
</item>
Author Affiliations
  1. The University of Hong Kong
  2. University of Birmingham