![]() Perceptual learning studies have shown that specific requirements should be met for learning to occur. Lines represent different hypothetical learning curves in situations where between- and within-session changes are combined in different ways. Schema of different time courses for learning. Moreover, neither study assessed how well learning was retained once practice had ceased, so the effect of training distribution on long term benefits is unclear. Thus, the effect of varying the training regimen on a task that displays both learning types is currently undocumented. showed only within-session learning in a visual experiment, while Wright & Sabin showed only between-session learning in the auditory domain. However, neither of two previous studies that varied the number of trials within sessions, while controlling the total amount of practice, reported both forms of learning: Aberg et al. Both types of learning can also occur on the same task – ( Fig. ![]() They also appear to have different electrophysiological correlates –. ![]() Within- and between-session learning probably represent two different processes, as they can be disrupted independently and show differences in retention. 1, green line), but can sometimes occur during a latent period after training has finished (between-session learning, ,, Fig. Improvements are often apparent while training (within-session learning, , Fig. Remarkably different time courses have been observed for perceptual learning. In addition, it is necessary to establish the amount of training beyond which no further benefit is gained. In the experiments described here we addressed two crucial questions: how much training is required overall to produce significant learning, and how is it best distributed across training sessions? In investigating these aspects of learning, the time course of improvements within and across training sessions, and the amount of practice required to trigger and sustain these improvements, are of fundamental importance. Consequently, it is important to find a balance between brevity and efficacy of training. However, learning may not occur if sessions are too short, and may require extensive training, sometimes occurring over thousands of practice trials. Training sessions that are shorter or fewer in number may increase compliance, especially in children. When designing training programs, whether for clinical or research use, it is important to use regimens which are feasible for the patient or participant, while ensuring that learning is also maximized. Systematically investigating the effects of varying the training regimen may provide insight into both learning mechanisms and the optimal design of applied training programs that aim to improve perceptual skills. Though learning can be contingent simply on the overall amount of practice, it can also be affected by other aspects of the training regimen, including the amount of practice within each session, , or the length of breaks between sessions ( for a review). Perceptual learning is the process whereby practice on a perceptual task, such as discriminating between sounds, improves performance on that task. However, the mechanisms of learning differed the single-session group continued to improve in the days following cessation of training, whereas the multi-session group showed no further improvement once training had ceased. In a second experiment we found no additional longer-term improvement in performance, retention, or transfer of learning for a group that trained over 4 sessions (∼4 hr in total) relative to a group that trained for a single session (∼1 hr). ![]() Between-session improvements were inversely correlated with performance they were largest at the start of training and reduced as training progressed. In later stages, the group with the longest training sessions (>1 hr) showed slower learning than the other groups, suggesting overtraining. While learning was relatively robust to variations in regimen, the group with the shortest training sessions (∼8 min) had significantly faster learning in early stages of training than groups with longer sessions. We investigated the efficacy of different regimens that varied in the distribution of practice across training sessions and in the overall amount of practice received on a frequency discrimination task. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |