Optimising assembly learning in older adults through the manipulation of instruction

Abstract

The present investigation assessed the putative benefits of reducing instructions for older adults' learning of an assembly task. Young and older adults had to build a product by assembling six components. Two groups practiced following instruction methods that differed in the degree of explicit information they conveyed about the correct assembly order. After practice, retention, consolidation of performance (tested immediately after practice and on a separate day, respectively) and stability of performance (tested by introducing a concurrent second task) were assessed. Younger adults showed similar performance levels for both instruction methods. Older adults, however, showed similar retention but clearly weaker consolidation and stability of performance following less encompassing instructions. Contrary to expectations, enhancing the involvement of explicit processes allowed older adults to gain a more permanent and stable performance improvements. The findings are discussed relative to the characteristics of the assembly task.

Abstract

Practitioner Summary: We addressed how performance and learning of older adults in an assembly task can be optimised through different types of instruction. The findings suggest that increasing awareness of task characteristics enhance not only long-term performance, but also resilience against distraction. Future work must evaluate if these findings generalise to more complex tasks.

Keywords::

• aging
• explicit instruction
• sequential learning
• resilience
• chain industry work

Acknowledgements

We thank Total Productivity for lending the ATA workstation and monitoring us in its use.

Notes

^1. Although it is often omitted (e.g. Chauvel et al. 2012; Howard and Howard 2001; Verneau et al., forthcoming), the latter is of crucial importance as older adults exhibit a weaker consolidation than younger adults, i.e. practice-induced changes in performance seem less permanent in the elderly (Spencer, Gouw, and Ivry 2007; Wilson et al. 2012).

^2. Due to technical problems, the workstation did not always detect the grasping of the stick (i.e. the first component), requiring the participants to re-enter the bin, which prolonged movement time for this component. Hence, we excluded the first component from our analyses.

^3. Notice that we did not assess the amount of knowledge accumulated during practice, and hence, that the actual degree to which the two instruction methods resulted in explicit or implicit motor learning cannot be independently verified.

Additional information

Funding

This work was financially supported by Body@work, Research Center on Physical Activity, Work and Health.