CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 116Motor Control and AdaptationCognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and Memory

The effects of working memory resource depletion and training on sensorimotor adaptation

Open access
Anguera, Joaquin A., Bernard, Jessica A., Jaeggi, Susanne M., Buschkuehl, Martin, Benson, Bryan L., Jennett, Sarah, Humfleet, Jennifer, Reuter-Lorenz, Patricia A. +2 more·2012·Behavioural Brain Research
DOI 10.1016/j.bbr.2011.11.040PMC PMC3264800
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We have recently demonstrated that visuospatial working memory performance predicts the rate of motor skill learning, particularly during the early phase of visuomotor adaptation. Here, we follow up these correlational findings with direct manipulations of working memory resources to determine the impact on visuomotor adaptation, a form of motor learning. We conducted two separate experiments. In the first one, we used a resource depletion strategy to investigate whether the rate of early visuomotor adaptation would be negatively affected by fatigue of spatial working memory resources. In the second study, we employed a dual n-back task training paradigm that has been shown to result in transfer effects [1] over five weeks to determine whether training-related improvements would boost the rate of early visuomotor adaptation. The depletion of spatial working memory resources negatively affected the rate of early visuomotor adaptation. However, enhancing working memory capacity via training did not lead to improved rates of visuomotor adaptation, suggesting that working memory capacity may not be the factor limiting maximal rate of visuomotor adaptation in young adults. These findings are discussed from a resource limitation/capacity framework with respect to current views of motor learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bbr.2011.11.040

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Transfer to untrained n-back tasks following n-back training holds true when the stimulus items are either from the same or a different domain to the trained items.

    “This holds true when the stimulus items are either from both the same (e.g., letters to digits) or different domain (e.g., spatial locations to digits) to the trained items (Li et al., 2008; Jaeggi et al., 2010; Anguera et al., 2012; Bürki et al., 2014; Waris et al., 2015; Küper and Karbach, 2016; Minear et al., 2016; Blacker et al., 2017).”

    From Are Working Memory Training Effects Paradigm-Specific? (2019) · cites this paper as Anguera et al., 2012

  • There was evidence suggesting n-back training transfers to n-back tasks with new stimulus materials.

    “In line with previous findings, there was evidence suggesting n-back training transfers to n-back tasks with new stimulus materials (Jaeggi et al., 2010; Anguera et al., 2012; Küper and Karbach, 2016; Minear et al., 2016; Soveri et al., 2017).”

    From Are Working Memory Training Effects Paradigm-Specific? (2019) · cites this paper as Anguera et al., 2012

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [13]Seidler RD Benson BL Boyden NB Kwak Y Oschner K Kosslyn S Skill acquisition Invited review for the Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Neurosciencein press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Anguera, J. A., Bernard, J. A., Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Benson, B. L., Jennett, S., Humfleet, J., Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Jonides, J., & Seidler, R. D.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Seidler, Rachael D.
ORCID
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-03
Volume
228
Issue
1
Pages
107-115
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.bbr.2011.11.040
PMC
PMC3264800
OpenAlex
W2140722830
Cited by
115
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (T32 AG000114)
  • National Institutes of Health (AG024106, DTRT07-G-0058, AG024824)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
working memory, visuomotor adaptation, sensorimotor adaptation, resource depletion, motor learning, working memory capacity, fatigue, transfer of training, resource constraints
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Psychomotor Performance, Transfer, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review