Contralateral Transfer of Reactive Inhibition as a Function of Sex and Interpolated Rest
- 1 June 1982
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Perceptual and Motor Skills
- Vol. 54 (3) , 979-985
- https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1982.54.3.979
Abstract
There is persuasive but not decisive evidence that females reminisce more than males do because they accumulate more reactive inhibition during prerest trials. The present study provided a further test of this hypothesis within the context of a bilateral-transfer design. 80 subjects, 40 of each sex, practiced continuously with the right hand for five 1-min. trials on a mirror-tracking task. Subgroups of the sample then shifted to continuous left-hand practice after transition intervals of 0, 2.5, 5.0, or 7.5 min. As predicted from theory, the slope of the prerest practice curve was lower for females than for males, and females' inferiority on the first transfer trial declined as the length of the transition interval increased. Sex differences in left-hand performance trends were also consistent with theory.This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- An Experimental Test of Current Theories of Psychomotor ReminiscencePerceptual and Motor Skills, 1981
- Psychomotor reminiscence and the menstrual cycleBulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1981
- The Sex Difference in Rotary Pursuit PerformanceJournal of Motor Behavior, 1980
- Effector Localization and Transfer of Reactive InhibitionJournal of Motor Behavior, 1979
- Psychomotor Reminiscence as a Function of Sex and Length of Rest PeriodJournal of Motor Behavior, 1979
- Pursuit Rotor Speed, Sex Differences, and Reminiscence in Young ChildrenThe Journal of Psychology, 1975
- Individual and sex differences in reminiscenceMemory & Cognition, 1975
- 'Reminiscence" in bilateral transfer.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952
- Effect of varying amounts of rest on conventional and bilateral transfer 'reminiscence."Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952
- Transfer of work inhibition in motor learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952