Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000094
DC FieldValue
dc.titleTime for Considering the Possibility That Sleep Plays No Unique Role in Motor Memory Consolidation: Reply to Adi-Japha and Karni (2016)
dc.contributor.authorRickard, Timothy C
dc.contributor.authorPan, Steven C
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-13T07:09:27Z
dc.date.available2022-07-13T07:09:27Z
dc.date.issued2017-04-01
dc.identifier.citationRickard, Timothy C, Pan, Steven C (2017-04-01). Time for Considering the Possibility That Sleep Plays No Unique Role in Motor Memory Consolidation: Reply to Adi-Japha and Karni (2016). PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN 143 (4) : 454-458. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000094
dc.identifier.issn00332909
dc.identifier.issn19391455
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/228400
dc.description.abstractThe hypothesis that sleep makes a unique contribution to motor memory consolidation has been debated in recent years. In the target article (Pan & Rickard, 2015), we reported results of a comprehensive meta-analysis of the explicit motor sequence learning literature in which evidence was evaluated for both enhanced performance after sleep and stabilization after sleep. After accounting for confounding variables, we found no compelling evidence for either empirical phenomenon, and hence no compelling evidence for sleep-specific consolidation. In their comment, Adi-Japha and Karni (2016) critiqued the target article on three primary grounds: (a) our unrealistic (in their view) assumption that, if sleep-specific consolidation occurs, it is mechanistically unitary across all variants of the motor sequence experiments included in the meta-analysis, (b) our inclusion of child groups, which they believe may have resulted in an underestimation of sleep effects among adult groups, and (c) our inclusion of several experiments with atypical experimental designs, which may have introduced unaccounted for heterogeneity. In this reply we address each of those potentially legitimate concerns. We show that the metaregression allowed for tests of multiple candidate variables that could engender separate consolidation mechanisms, yielding no behavioral evidence for it. We also show through reanalysis that the inclusion of child groups had virtually no impact on the parameter estimates among adults, and that the inclusion of experiments with atypical designs did not materially influence parameter estimates.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherAMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
dc.sourceElements
dc.subjectSocial Sciences
dc.subjectPsychology
dc.subjectPsychology, Multidisciplinary
dc.subjectsleep consolidation
dc.subjectmotor skills
dc.subjectmotor sequence learning
dc.subjectsleep enhancement
dc.subjectprocedural memory
dc.subjectDAYTIME SLEEP
dc.subjectSEQUENCE
dc.subjectSKILL
dc.subjectPERFORMANCE
dc.subjectBENEFITS
dc.subjectSTABILIZATION
dc.subjectACQUISITION
dc.subjectLIMITATIONS
dc.subjectCHILDHOOD
dc.subjectCHILDREN
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2022-07-11T07:27:11Z
dc.contributor.departmentPSYCHOLOGY
dc.description.doi10.1037/bul0000094
dc.description.sourcetitlePSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN
dc.description.volume143
dc.description.issue4
dc.description.page454-458
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
RP_PB_2017.pdf111.91 kBAdobe PDF

CLOSED

Published

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.