Human Movement Science 4 (1985) 87-90 87

North-Holland

BOOK REVIEWS

R.A. Magi11 (ed.), Memory and control of action. Advances in psy-

chology, Vol. 12. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1983, xvi + 396 p. Dfl.
125.00.

A case of learning movements or learning how to move?

The function of learning and memory in the organization of skilled

movements has tended to be overlooked in the recent past. This may be
because the dynamic and goal-directed nature of skilled action is not
easily represented by traditional information processing models of
performance (eg. Welford 1976) which are primarily static and stimu-
lus-driven (Robb 1972). Over the last few years however, the historic
concern to account for changes in performance with practice has been
growing, together with a related interest in the link between knowledge
and action (e.g. Newell 1978; Newell and Barclay 1982). This trend is
confirmed by Magill’s collection of readings on ‘Memory and control
of action’; taken from a conference held in February 1982 at Louisiana
State University. The intention of the book according to its editor, is to
present an integrated view of learning and performance. It attempts to
do this by bringing together a number of perspectives on their relation-
ship, and is therefore important in challenging the separate examination
of ‘memory’ and ‘action’ by highlighting their interdependence.
Ironically, the eclectic approach of the book may have impeded the
attainment of its aim. It presents a bewildering variety of approaches to
learning and performance which stem from research on limb control
and coordination, motor memory, attention, verbal learning, speech
production and language acquisition. Paradoxically, this selection
seemed to be, in one sense over-broad, and in another, not broad
enough. In the first case, the relevance of certain approaches to the role
of memory in action was not always clear, possibly because some
included research was indeed irrelevant to this issue. Conversely in the
second case, certain relevant research may not have been included.

0167-9457/85/$3.30 0 1985, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland)

88 Book reviews

When one considers the omission of work on perception, skill develop-

ment, problem solving, robotics and control engineering, this seems
likely. In any event, an integrated view of learning and performance is
not what emerges from the book as a whole.
It did however raise a number of important issues on the subject.
These included the context specificity of (skill) learning, the existence
of qualitative changes in motor control with extended practice, and
their reflection in the kinematic details of performance. A recurring
concern which largely subsumes those above was with the relationship
of cognition to action, and the related problem of how action is
represented in memory. As these topics are central to the theme of the
book they will now be briefly considered.
That the human performer becomes better able to organize goal-di-
rected movements with practice is undisputed. The contention lies in
trying to account for this change. As Saltzman and Kelso make clear in
their critique of traditional interpretations, there is a tendency to
assume that what is learned is the behaviour itself: ‘central representa-
tions’ of (aspects of) movements leading to effective task performance.
After Summerfield et al. these authors label this assumption a First
Order Isomorphism Fallacy (FOIF). By this they mean “taking the
predicates that result from describing or observing a phenomenon. . . as-
signing those predicates to a memory structure in the brain and.. . of
claiming thereby, to explain the phenomenon”, (p. 24). Saltzman and
Kelso go on to advocate an alternative interpretation which proposes
that memory for action is procedurally embedded in the process of
action organization and production. In the language of Fowler and
Turvey (1978) what performers learn is to make of themselves special
purpose devices whose behaviour satisfies the natural and invariant
constraints of the task.
This analysis is revealing because it clearly contrasts two different
views of skill acquisition. The first assumes a process of movement
learning, in which sufficient features of task action are stored in
memory to allow their future reproduction. This leads researchers to
search for the underlying structure of motor responses (cf. Schmidt’s
chapter), and requires an elaborate method by which to retrieve stored
actions appropriate to the prevailing task context (cf. the chapters by
Kerr, MacKay, Mathews et al. and Shea and Zimny). The second
perspective views skill acquisition as the result of some internal modifi-
cation of the process of movement organization. This encourages con-
 Book reuiews 89

sideration of the method by which movements become constrained in

coordinated action (cf. Martenuik and Romanov’s proposal for a Four-
ier theory of movement production and the chapter by Rosenbaum). In
short, Saltzman and Kelso articulate an important distinction between
theories of movement learning and those of learning how to move.
But there is something puzzling about their determination to propose
a theory of the latter type which makes no use of movement related
knowledge. Certainly performance becomes constrained by the rules of
a motor task (‘global organizational invariants’) and the state of the
task environment (‘local tuning parameters’). The question is how.
Saltzman and Kelso suggest that this occurs as performers become
increasingly sensitive to these constraints through a sophisticated form
of direct perception. This answer is unsatisfactory for at least two
reasons. Not only is it difficult to believe that perception can be direct
if it develops gradually over time, but there are types of information
relevant to skilled performance which cannot in principle be derived
from sensation alone. Consider for example information about the
consequences of movement on the environment (cf. Roy’s discussion of
conceptual knowledge about object functions). Such information only
becomes available through a series of actor-environment interactions,
and appears to require abstraction by a cognitive process which stores a
schematic representation of the relevant movement-outcome relation-
ship (Frohlich and Elliott 1984).
Since this is tantamount to admitting the existence of an internal
model, the debate has turned full circle. Saltzman and Kelso would
almost certainly label this a FOIF. This simply demonstrates the fact
that the role of cognition in motor control remains unclear, whichever
theory of skill acquisition one chooses to develop. If Magill’s book
encourages researchers to re-examine this issue then it will at least have
been instrumental in bringing forward the integration of learning with
performance.

D.M. Frohlich

References

Fowler, C.A. and M.T. Turvey, 1978. ‘Skill acquisition: an event approach with special reference
to searching for the optimum of a function of several variables’. In: G.E. Stelmach (ed.),
Information processing in motor control and learning. New York: Academic Press.
90 Book reviews

Frohlich, D.M. and J.M. Elliott, 1984. The schematic representation of effector function underly-
ing perceptual-motor skill. Journal of Motor Behaviour 16, 40-60.
Newell, K.M., 1978. ‘Some issues on action plans’. In: G.E. Stelmach (ed.), Information processing
in motor control and learning. New York: Academic Press.
Newell, K.M. and CR. Barclay, 1982. ‘Developing knowledge about action’. In: J.A.S. Kelso and
J.E. Clark (eds.), The development of movement control and coordination. New York: Wiley.
Robb, M.D., 1972. Task analysis: a consideration for teachers of skills. Research Quarterly 43,
362-373.
Welford, A.T., 1976. Skilled performance; perceptual and motor skills. Glenview. IL: Scott,
Foresman & Co.

James Watkins, 1983. An introduction to mechanics of human move-

ment. Lancaster: MTP Press Limited.

The target group of this book are primarily undergraduate students of

physical education and human movement. The book can be regarded as
a first course in mechanics for students who do not have any previous
knowledge of mathematics or mechanics. Although the book is limited
to a treatment of the concepts of force and torque with respect to linear
and angular motion of, in particular, the entire human body as a free
body diagram, I agree with the author that a thorough understanding of
their concepts and the laws of Newton is an important key to under-
standing mechanics. Kinematics as well as the applications of Newtons’s
laws are illustrated with many nice examples ~ particularly from the
field of athletics and gymnastics. The book is suitable for self study.
For coaches and physiotherapists whose intention is to improve the
movements of athletes or patients on the basis of a proper understand-
ing of the mechanics of motion, this book can only be a first orienta-
tion. They will need, in addition, at least a thorough knowledge of
concepts like work, power and energy as well as applications of
mechanics to the musculoskeletal system.
However, for the target group this book is a good one with which to
begin.

Gerrit Jan van Ingen Schenau