title: Examining the specificity of practice hypothesis: is learning modality specific?
abstract: The specificity of practice hypothesis was examined using a tracking task. In Experiment 1, visual or auditory feedback about performance was provided. Vision was more useful than audition early in acquisition. Performance gains found in acquisition were maintained during retention, but learning was specific only if the acquisition modality was visual. Specificity did not increase with the amount of practice. In Experiment 2, visual and auditory information were combined. Again, the specificity of practice hypothesis was supported. Also, instructing participants to attend to one information source allowed us to demonstrate that information can be explicitly or implicitly processed. Further, specificity effects may occur because of different rates of development for error detection and correction processes.
authors.affiliation: Department of Kinesiology at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Coull
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Tremblay
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Elliott
mesh_terms: D001307:Auditory Perception; D005246:Feedback / Q000502:physiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D008297:Male; D011214:Practice, Psychological; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology*; D012153:Retention, Psychology / Q000502:physiology; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D014796:Visual Perception