Implicit Sequence Learning in Children

Meulemans, Thierry; Linden, Martial Van der; Perruchet, Pierre

doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2442

Cited by 207 publications

(278 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

211

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But the basic idea underlying this study is that, even if it is proved that explicit mechanisms may play a role in SRT performance, this does not mean that the SRT paradigm is an explicit task per se. Our hypothesis is that participants' ability to use explicit strategies in the SRT task depends on the characteristics of the task, including the RSI, the kind of instructions given to participants, or the disruption of the sequence by the interpolation of random elements between each presentation of the deterministic sequence (e.g., Meulemans et al, 1998). the PI explicit learning group processed the regular trials quicker.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other evidence comes from studies showing a dissociation between performance on the SRT task and performance on a subsequent explicit task (e.g., a recognition or generation task). If participants show sequence learning in the SRT task and no sequence knowledge in an explicit task, this result can be viewed as an argument in favor of the existence of sequence-learning mechanisms that occur outside of consciousness (e.g., Meulemans, Van der Linden, & Perruchet, 1998;Perruchet, Bigand, & BenoitGonin, 1997). However, these data must always be treated with caution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What is the impact of the explicit knowledge of sequence regularities on both deterministic and probabilistic serial reaction time task performance?

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to explore the role of prior explicit sequence knowledge by comparing its influence on serial reaction time (SRT) performance with either a deterministic or a probabilistic sequence. The results confirm that, with a deterministic sequence, preliminary explicit learning improves SRT performance. On the other hand, with a probabilistic sequence, the results show no advantage for SRT performance in explicitlearning conditions. In addition, by using the process dissociation procedure (Jacoby, 1991), we show that performance on a subsequent generation task was more sustained by controlled processes for participants in the explicit-learning conditions than for those in the incidental condition. On the whole, these results, showing that the influence of explicit knowledge can be suppressed in certain specific conditions, are consistent with the intervention of both implicit and explicit mechanisms in SRT tasks, and the results also show that their relative influence can be modulated by the particular demands of the task.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the impact of the explicit knowledge of sequence regularities on both deterministic and probabilistic serial reaction time task performance?

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, the literature is more divided. Some results suggest that implicit learning skills are developmentally invariant; that is, that they are detectable in early infancy (Fiser & Aslin, 2002;Saffran, 2003;Saffran, Aslin, & Newport, 1996), and that they do not differ or differ only slightly between children and adults (e.g., Cherry & Stadler, 1995;Howard & Howard, 1989;Meulemans, Van der Linden, & Perruchet, 1998;Seger, 1994;Thomas & Nelson, 2001). Other results find evidence that implicit learning skills do change over childhood (Janacsek, Fiser, & Nemeth, 2012;Thomas et al, 2004), particularly for higher-order patterns (Howard & Howard, 1997).…”

Section: Theoretical Concerns About the Auditory Scaffolding Hypothmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, the most salient is the Serial Reaction Time (SRT) task (Nissen & Bullemer, 1987), which can also be used with children (Meulemans et al, 1998). It has been found to be robustly sensitive to individual and group differences in language processing (Kidd, 2012;Tomblin et al, 2007) as well as higher-order cognitive skills (Kaufman et al, 2010).…”

Section: Empirical Concerns About the Auditory Scaffolding Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory access, language access, and implicit sequence learning in deaf children

Hall

Eigsti

Bortfeld

et al. 2017

Developmental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developmental psychology plays a central role in shaping evidence-based best practices for prelingually deaf children. The Auditory Scaffolding Hypothesis (Conway et al., 2009) asserts that a lack of auditory stimulation in deaf children leads to impoverished implicit sequence learning abilities, measured via an artificial grammar learning (AGL) task. However, prior research is confounded by a lack of both auditory and language input. The current study examines implicit learning in deaf children who were (Deaf native signers) or were not (oral cochlear implant users) exposed to language from birth, and in hearing children, using both AGL and Serial Reaction Time (SRT) tasks. Neither deaf nor hearing children across the three groups show evidence of implicit learning on the AGL task, but all three groups show robust implicit learning on the SRT task. These findings argue against the Auditory Scaffolding Hypothesis, and suggest that implicit sequence learning may be resilient to both auditory and language deprivation, within the tested limits.

show abstract

“…After some amount of practice, performance of participants on the repeated sequence is generally better than performance on a new sequence. In recent years, a huge number of studies using SRT tasks have improved our knowledge about various issues, such as the implicit-learning abilities of children (e.g., Meulemans, Van Der Linden, & Perruchet, 1998), elderly people (e.g., Curran, 1997), and neurologically impaired patients (e.g., Smith, Siegert, McDowall, & Abernethy, 2001), the relationships between performance and explicit knowledge (e.g., Shanks & Perruchet, 2002), and the relationships between perceptual and motor components of learning (e.g., Kelly, Burton, Riedel, & Lynch, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit learning of a repeated segment in continuous tracking: A reappraisal

Chambaron

Ginhac

Ferrel-Chapus

et al. 2006

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceSeveral prior studies have apparently demonstrated implicit learning of a repeated segment in continuous-tracking tasks. In two conceptual replications of these studies, we failed to reproduce the original findings. However, these findings were reproduced in a third experiment, in which we used the same repeated segment as that used in the Wulf et al. studies. Analyses of the velocity and the acceleration of the target suggests that this repeated segment could be easier to track than the random segments serving as control, accounting for the results of Wulf and collaborators. Overall these experiments suggest that learning a repeated segment in continuous-tracking tasks may be much more difficult than learning from a repeated sequence in conventional serial reaction time tasks. A possible explanation for this difference is outlined

show abstract

Implicit Sequence Learning in Children

Cited by 207 publications

References 41 publications

What is the impact of the explicit knowledge of sequence regularities on both deterministic and probabilistic serial reaction time task performance?

What is the impact of the explicit knowledge of sequence regularities on both deterministic and probabilistic serial reaction time task performance?

Auditory access, language access, and implicit sequence learning in deaf children

Implicit learning of a repeated segment in continuous tracking: A reappraisal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About