ArticleNPJ science of learning2022
Speed and accuracy instructions affect two aspects of skill learning differently.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- No gender differences in predictive processing.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Effect of massed versus distributed preclinical training on subgingival instrumentation skill across the preclinical-to-clinical transition.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Action Feedback Enables Novices to Implicitly Acquire Task Regularities from Experts During Joint Statistical Learning.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Interbrain neural correlates of self and other integration in joint statistical learning.NPJ science of learning · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Procedural learning is key to optimal skill learning and is essential for functioning in everyday life. The findings of previous studies are contradictory regarding whether procedural learning can be modified by prioritizing speed or accuracy during learning. The conflicting results may be due to the fact that procedural learning is a multifaceted cognitive function. The purpose of our study is to determine whether and how speed and accuracy instructions affect two aspects of procedural learning: the learning of probability-based and serial-order-based regularities. Two groups of healthy individuals were instructed to practice on a cued probabilistic sequence learning task: one group focused on being fast and the other on being accurate during the learning phase. The speed instruction resulted in enhanced expression of probability-based but not serial-order-based knowledge. After a retention period, we instructed the participants to focus on speed and accuracy equally, and we tested their acquired knowledge. The acquired knowledge was comparable between groups in both types of learning. These findings suggest that different aspects of procedural learning can be affected differently by instructions. However, only momentary performance might be boosted by speed instruction; the acquired knowledge remains intact. In addition, as the accuracy instruction resulted in accuracy near ceiling level, the results illustrate that response errors are not needed for humans to learn in the procedural domain and draw attention to the fact that different instructions can separate competence from performance.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.