ArticlePsychological research2024
Task integration in complex, bimanual sequence learning tasks.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Motor sequences resist automatization as attentional demands increase with sequence learning.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Task integration and anticipation in complex, continuous motor tasks.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequence learning and multitasking studies have largely focused on simple motor skills, which cannot be directly transferred to the plethora of complex skills found outside of laboratory conditions. Established theories e.g. for bimanual tasks and task integration thus have to be reassessed in the context of complex motor skills. We hypothesize that under more complex conditions, task integration facilitates motor learning, impedes or suppresses effector-specific learning and can still be observed despite partial secondary task interference. We used the Ξ-apparatus to assess the learning success of six groups in a bimanual dual-task, in which we manipulated the degree of possible integration between the right-hand and the left-hand sequences. We could show that task integration positively influences the learning of these complex, bimanual skills. However, the integration impedes but not fully suppresses effector-specific learning, as we could measure reduced hand-specific learning. Task integration improves learning despite the disruptive effect of partial secondary task interference, but its mitigating effect is only effective to some extent. Overall, the results suggest that previous insights on sequential motor learning and task integration can largely also be applied to complex motor skills.
Indexed as
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.