PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Dieter Nattkemper

Publications and source records attributed to Dieter Nattkemper.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Instruction-induced feature binding.

In order to test whether or not instructions specifying the stimulus-response (S-R) mappings for a new task suffice to create bindings between specified stimulus and response features, we developed a dual task paradigm of the ABBA type in which participants saw new S-R instructions for the A-task in the beginning of each trial. Immediately after the A-task instructions, participants had to perform a logically independent B-task. The imperative stimulus for the A-task was presented after the B-task had been executed. The present data show that the instructed S-R mappings influence performance on the embedded B-task, even when they (1) have never been practiced, and (2) are irrelevant with respect to the B-task. These results imply that instructions can induce bindings between S- and R-features without prior execution of the task at hand.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

The role of anticipation and intention in the learning of effects of self-performed actions.

The anticipative learning model for acquiring action-effect relations states that the acquisition of action-effect relations depends on processes that are part of action planning, in particular the anticipation of possible effects. Experiment 1 shows that response planning is indeed crucial for the learning of response effects. In this experiment distractors (tones) were presented either during response preparation or in the time interval between response execution and the presentation of a response effect. Response-effect learning was impaired when the distractors were presented during response preparation. The finding is consistent with the assumption that the distractors impaired the anticipation of potential effects and therefore reduced effect learning. In Experiment 2 all responses had two effects. Participants were instructed to produce one of the effects. Under this condition, response-effect learning was only found for the instructed effect, not for the non-instructed effect. The two experiments thus support the view that response-effect learning is selective and depends on the anticipation of potential effects during response planning. The results are discussed in terms of a model that explains both the learning of response-effect relations and the use of these effects for action control within the same theoretical framework.

Attention↗
PubMed2003

Sequence learning in Parkinson's disease: the effect of spatial stimulus-response compatibility.

Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) have repeatedly demonstrated reduced sequence-specific learning effects in serial reaction time tasks (SRTs). Previous research with PD patients has mainly employed the 'classical' SRT task, involving a spatially compatible assignment of stimuli and responses. From cognitive research, it is known that spatial compatibility triggers rapid, automatic responses in the direction of the stimulus. Automatic responding has shown to be disinhibited in PD patients and may therefore interfere with stimulus anticipation during the learning process. The aim of the present study was to test this hypothesis by investigating if reduced sequence-specific learning depends on spatial stimulus-response compatibility. PD patients and age-matched controls were examined either with an SRT variant involving central stimulus presentation, thereby preventing automatic linking of stimulus and response locations, or with a spatially compatible SRT task. Patients showed reduced sequence-specific learning effects only when the stimulus-response assignment was spatially compatible. This pattern of results confirms the hypothesis that sequence learning deficits in PD may result from a predominance of automatic response activation over learning-based stimulus anticipations during the learning phase.

Female↗