By the end of the final training session, Compatible and Incompatible groups reach the performance level of the Same group, whereas the New group does not, in both experiments.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In experiment 1, by the end of session 4 the Compatible, Incompatible, and Same groups did not differ significantly, while the New group had the lowest performance. → Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes 2025 q3 i? In experiment 2, by the end of session 2 the Same and Compatible groups did not differ, while the New group performed significantly lower than the Same and Compatible groups. → Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes 2025¶

Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes. (2025). Faster implicit motor sequence learning of new sequences compatible in terms of movement transitions. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00296-4

q3 · i? · causal · r2

End of session 4 in experiment 1: "The performance between the Compatibl e, Incompatible, and Same groups showed no significant difference", while the New group differed from all (see sibling claim) with the lowest performance. No effect size printed.

"The performance between the Compatibl e, Incompatible, and Same groups showed no significant difference (compatible and incompatible:p = 0.761, compatible and same:p = 0.481, incompatible and same:p =1 . ) ."

Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes 2025 (2)¶

Susanne Dyck & Christian Klaes. (2025). Faster implicit motor sequence learning of new sequences compatible in terms of movement transitions. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00296-4

q3 · i? · causal · r2

End of session 2 in experiment 2: "a significant difference of the Δ compound values between the Same and New groups (p = 0.008) and between the Compatible and New groups (p = 0.014)"; Same and Compatible did not differ (p = 1.). No effect size printed.

"Post-hoc tests confirmed a significant difference of the Δ compound values between the Same and New groups (p = 0.008) and between the Compatible and New groups (p = 0.014), with a lower performance in the New group in both cases."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Compatible and Incompatible groups performed comparably across learning, indicating that the basis of compatibility in implicit MSL is shared movement transitions rather than ordinal positions. — related
• After three prior training sessions, implicit learning of sequences compatible in movement transitions (both Compatible and Incompatible groups) is faster than learning a completely new sequence in experiment 1. — related
• In experiment 1, novel movement transitions were performed better in the Compatible and Incompatible groups than in the New group, while initially learned transitions were retained better in the Same group. — related
• The facilitative learning effect in implicit MSL depends on the amount of previous training: after only one prior session, the Compatible group did not outperform the New group and no novel-transition integration advantage emerged. — related
• In implicit motor sequence learning, sequence-specific performance shows a significant timepoint-by-group interaction in both a 4-day and a 2-day training design. — related
• Switching from a trained implicit motor sequence to a new, compatible, or incompatible sequence significantly reduces sequence-specific performance compared with continuing the same sequence, in both experiments. — related