Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure

Destrebecqz, Arnaud; Cleeremans, Axel

doi:10.3758/bf03196171

Cited by 458 publications

(524 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

498

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Crump et al (in press) showed an ISPC-like effect where participants were unable to guess the congruency Implicit Control 27 proportions of different display locations. Implicit learning has also been observed in priming studies (Bodner & Masson, 2001Greenwald, Abrams, Naccache, & Stanislas, 2003;Jaskowski, Skalska, & Verleger, 2003), sequential learning studies (Destrebecqz & Cleeremans, 2001;Jiménez & Méndez, 1999;Mayr, 1996;Nissen & Bullemer, 1987), and object-location learning studies (Hoffmann & Kunde, 1999;Musen, 1996). Additionally, Lewicki (1986;Lewicki et al, 1992Lewicki et al, , 1997 reported various demonstrations of implicit covariation learning (cf., Hendrickx et al, 1997aHendrickx et al, , 1997b.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Schmidt

Crump

Cheesman

et al. 2007

Consciousness and Cognition

169

268

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of four experiments provide evidence for controlled processing in the absence of awareness. Participants identified the colour of a neutral distracter word. Each of four words (e.g., MOVE) was presented in one of four colours 75% of the time (Experiments 1 and 4) or 50% of the time (Experiment 2 and 3). Colour identification was faster when the words appeared in the colour they were most often presented in relative to when they appeared in another colour, even for participants who were subjectively unaware of any contingencies between the words and colours. An analysis of sequence effects showed that participants who were unaware of the relation between distracter words and colours nonetheless controlled the impact of the word on performance depending on the nature of the previous trial. A block analysis of contingencyunaware participants revealed that contingencies were learned rapidly in the first block of trials.Experiment 3 showed that the contingency effect does not depend on level of awareness, thus ruling out explicit strategy accounts. Finally, Experiment 4 showed that the contingency effect results from behavioural control and not from semantic association or stimulus familiarity. These results thus provide evidence for implicit control. Implicit Control 3Contingency Learning without Awareness: Evidence for Implicit Control Cognitive processes that are controlled are conventionally assumed to operate in a slow, effortful, and voluntary manner (Posner & Cohen, 1984;Posner & Snyder, 1975; Shiffrin & Schnieder, 1977). Thus, when researchers discuss the influence of "controlled" processes, it is typically assumed that such processes are explicit (i.e., conscious; cf., Besner & Stolz, 1999). As such, the term "implicit control" would seem to be nonsensical, because "implicit" (i.e., unconscious) seems to preclude the possibility of control. However, etymologically speaking this is not a necessary conclusion. The Oxford English Dictionary (2001) Evidence for cognitive control, which is assumed to be explicit and strategic in nature, has been drawn from the Stroop literature (Stroop, 1935). In the Stroop task, identification of the print colour of colour words is slower when the word and ink colour are incongruent (e.g., the word GREEN in orange; GREEN orange ) than when they are congruent (e.g., ORANGE orange ; see MacLeod, 1991, for a review). Probably the most important demonstration of putatively controlled processes in the Stroop literature is the proportion congruent effect. The proportion congruent effect refers to the finding that the size of the Stroop effect is influenced by the proportion of congruent items in a block of trials (Lindsay & Jacoby, 1994;Logan & Zbrodoff, 1979). Specifically, the Stroop effect is much larger in a high proportion congruent block of trials than in a low proportion congruent block of trials. This effect is commonly attributed to Implicit Control 4 participants explicitly learning to predict the colour from the word. Specifically, because the word us...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Schmidt

Crump

Cheesman

et al. 2007

Consciousness and Cognition

169

268

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The next target appeared after a response-stimulus interval (RSI) of 0 ms. This RSI was employed because some previous work has suggested that it is optimal for eliciting implicit learning (Destrebecqz and Cleeremans, 2001). RTs for participants trained with SOC1 and SOC2 as their probable sequence were combined in the following analyses.…”

Section: Sequential Rt Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disruption of Sequential Priming in Organic and Pharmacological Amnesia: A Role for the Medial Temporal Lobes in Implicit Contextual Learning

Shanks

Channon

Wilkinson

et al. 2005

Neuropsychopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined learning and expression of contextual implicit learning of a sequence of targets in a speeded target-detection task in amnesic and control participants. Amnesia was of organic origin in one participant group and induced psychopharmacologically (diazepam 7.5 or 15 mg) in another. Although the amnesic groups were able to learn the target sequence normally, their expression of sequence knowledge (priming) was attenuated when contextual support was limited. This was evaluated by studying response latencies for targets primed by between 0 and 5 preceding context locations. Whereas control participants showed priming when the current target location was primed by only two previous locations, priming was eliminated with two (but not four) previous locations by a low dose of diazepam and was eliminated even with four elements of context under a high dose of diazepam and in amnesia of organic origin. The results suggest that a function of the hippocampal memory system is to support contextual learning and performance, even when that learning is nondeclarative.

show abstract

“…To test probabilistic sequence learning we used an alternating serial reaction time task (ASRTT) in which every alternate component is sequenced according to a predictable rule with pseudorandom trials in between (see Howard & Howard, 1997;Németh et al, 2010;Romano, Howard, & Howard, 2010). The main reason for using a probabilistic sequence was to avoid the emergence of explicit knowledge, which might alter performance (Cleeremans & Jiménez, 1998;Destrebecqz & Cleeremans, 2001;Perruchet, Bigand, & Benoit-Gonin, 1997;Remillard, 2008;Remillard & Clark, 2001;Song et al, 2007). We tested whether consolidation would OFFLINE CONSOLIDATION 7 differ for the learning of probabilistic and deterministic sequences, in particular, whether it might be stronger for deterministic sequences (see Deroost, Zeeuws, & Soetens, 2006;Destrebecqz & Cleeremans, 2001;Wilkinson & Jahanshahi, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main reason for using a probabilistic sequence was to avoid the emergence of explicit knowledge, which might alter performance (Cleeremans & Jiménez, 1998;Destrebecqz & Cleeremans, 2001;Perruchet, Bigand, & Benoit-Gonin, 1997;Remillard, 2008;Remillard & Clark, 2001;Song et al, 2007). We tested whether consolidation would OFFLINE CONSOLIDATION 7 differ for the learning of probabilistic and deterministic sequences, in particular, whether it might be stronger for deterministic sequences (see Deroost, Zeeuws, & Soetens, 2006;Destrebecqz & Cleeremans, 2001;Wilkinson & Jahanshahi, 2007). In fact, it has been shown that when sequence structure is complex, as it is for probabilistic sequences, offline consolidation of sequence learning may not occur (Goedert & Willingham, 2002), or at least not unless the sequence is explicit and not without an interval including sleep (see Cohen & Robertson, 2007;Song, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offline consolidation in implicit sequence learning

Meier¹,

Cock²

2014

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study was to investigate offline memory consolidation with regard to general motor skill learning and implicit sequence-specific learning. We trained young adults on a serial reaction time task with a retention interval of either 24 hours (Experiment 1) or 1 week (Experiment 2) between two sessions. We manipulated sequence complexity (deterministic vs. probabilistic) and motor responses (unimanual or vs. bimanual). We found no evidence of offline memory consolidation for sequencespecific learning with either interval (in the sense of no deterioration over the interval but no further improvement either). However, we did find evidence of offline enhancement of general motor skill learning with both intervals, independent of kind of sequence or kind of response. These results suggest that general motor skill learning, but not sequence-specific learning, appears to be enhanced during offline intervals in implicit sequence learning.Keywords: implicit learning, motor skill learning, retention interval OFFLINE CONSOLIDATION 3 IntroductionThere have been a vast number of studies on sequence learning, but only recently has there been much interest in how it relates to memory consolidation. The term consolidation usually refers to the stabilization, and even enhancement, of memory traces after their initial acquisition. For example, it has been demonstrated that the performance of some procedures can be significantly improved after a "silent" or offline interval subsequent to training. During this interval, there is no further practice, or even mention, of the procedure, and learning remains largely tacit or implicit (Brown & Robertson, 2007;Hallgato, Gyori-Dani, Pekar, Janacsek, & Nemeth, 2013;Krakauer & Shadmehr, 2006;Németh et al., 2010). Consolidation is also sometimes referred to as resistance to interference and forgetting (Ghilardi, Moisello, Silvestri, Ghez, & Krakauer, 2009;Goedert & Willingham, 2002; Stephan, Meier, Orosz, Cattapan-Ludewig, & KaelinLang, 2009). In the present study, we use the first definition (i.e., further improvement or enhancement). For related reviews see Doyon et al. (2009) Offline consolidation of sequence learning may depend on a variety of factors, such as training session intervals (Albouy et al., 2008;Press, Casement, Pascual-Leone, & Robertson, 2005;, practice (Korman, Raz, Flash, & Karni, 2003;Shanks & Cameron, 2000;Steele & Penhune, 2010), sleep vs.,wakefulness and time of day (Brawn, Fenn, Nusbaum, & Margoliash, 2010;Cajochen et al., 2004;Della-Maggiore, 2005;Doyon et al., 2009;Fischer, Hallschmid, Elsner, & Born, 2002;Keisler, Ashe, & Willingham, 2007;Kuriyama, Stickgold, & Walker, 2004;Manoach et al., 2004;Maquet, Schwartz, Passingham, & Frith, 2003 The purpose of the present study was to investigate the separate contributions of general motor skill learning and sequence-specific memory consolidation in implicit sequence learning. General motor skill learning refers to faster responses as a result of practice. Sequence-specific learning refers to faster ...

show abstract

Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure

Cited by 458 publications

References 39 publications

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Disruption of Sequential Priming in Organic and Pharmacological Amnesia: A Role for the Medial Temporal Lobes in Implicit Contextual Learning

Offline consolidation in implicit sequence learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About