Anticipatory Gaze Reveals Individual Differences in Implicit Sequence Learning Before Motor Performance
Sinha, O.; Crews, L. G.; Pleasant, W. A.; Borich, M. R.; Wheaton, L. A.
Show abstract
Implicit sequence learning is commonly inferred from changes in motor performance, although anticipatory gaze behavior may provide complementary information about emerging perceptual sequence knowledge. We tracked anticipatory gaze and response time on every trial of a reach-grasp-and-move sequence-learning task to examine when individual differences became detectable in each measure. Between-participant differences became detectable earlier in anticipatory gaze than in response time, with this ordering preserved in 95.5% of participant-level bootstrap resamples. Across the repeated sequence, anticipatory gaze became increasingly frequent, and most participants showed faster responses on anticipatory-gaze trials. Exploratory analyses further indicated that participants differed in the trial-to-trial persistence of anticipatory gaze, but these gaze characteristics were not reliably associated with sequence-specific motor learning expressed at the end of the session. Together, these findings show that anticipatory gaze and motor performance provide related but non-redundant information about implicit sequence learning where individual differences in perceptual knowledge may be detectable before corresponding differences are apparent in behavioral performance.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Attention defines the context for implicit sensorimotor adaptation 95%
- Did we get sensorimotor adaptation wrong? Implicit adaptation as direct policy updating rather than forward-model-based learning 94%
- Motor sequence learning involves better prediction of the next action andoptimization of movement trajectories 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.