Qualitative differences between implicit and explicit sequence learning.

Jiménez, Luís; Vaquero, Joaquín M. M.; Lupiáñez, Juan

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.475

Cited by 100 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This detrimental effect of intentional search or divided attention on the expression, but not acquisition of learning, has been demonstrated in the past Jimenez et al, 2006). The fact that in the present experiment continued search did not impair expression in the Respond groups suggests that learning based on motor responses is less sensitive to the effects of divided attention and explicit search.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 35%

“…Our goal was to see if continued search for the pattern affected the expression of perceptual or motor based learning. Engaging in intentional search often interferes with expression of implicit learning although not its acquisition (Jimenez et al, 2006;Song et al, 2007). In this manner, in addition to asking whether implicit sequence learning could occur via observation alone, we could assess whether intentional search had an effect on the expression of such learning.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task

Song

Howard

2008

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the serial reaction time task (SRTT), a sequence of visuo-spatial cues instructs subjects to perform a sequence of movements which follow a repeating pattern. Though motor responses are known to support implicit sequence learning in this task, the goal of the present experiments is to determine whether observation of the sequence of cues alone can also yield evidence of implicit sequence learning. This question has been difficult to answer because in previous research, performance improvements which appeared to be due to implicit perceptual sequence learning could also be due to spontaneous increases in explicit knowledge of the sequence. The present experiments use probabilistic sequences to prevent the spontaneous development of explicit awareness. They include a training phase, during which half of the subjects observe and the other half respond, followed by a transfer phase in which everyone responds. Results show that observation alone can support sequence learning, which translates at transfer into equivalent performance as that of a group who made motor responses during training. However, perceptual learning or its expression is sensitive to changes in target colors, and its expression is impaired by concurrent explicit search. Motor-response based learning is not affected by these manipulations. Thus, observation alone can support implicit sequence learning, even of higher order probabilistic sequences. However, perceptual learning can be prevented or concealed by variations of stimuli or task demands.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 35%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task

Song

Howard

2008

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Single-system views predict that fostering or hindering explicit knowledge respectively increases or decreases the amount of implicit learning (Jiménez, Vaquero & Lupiáñez, 2006;Sanchez & Reber, 2013). In our study, incidental and intentional (implicit and explicit) learners were similar in their inability to express temporal learning under a complex ordinal load, as well as in their ability to do it under simple load.…”

Section: Ordinal Load and Incidental Temporal Learning ! 22mentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Thus, the same strategic factor (ordinal load complexity) that controlled the expression of explicit knowledge controlled the expression of implicit knowledge too (Jiménez et al, 2006). This speaks in favour of a single (implicit-explicit) memory system, possibly showing different outputs depending on the means used for probing acquired knowledge (Jamieson & Mewhort, 2009).…”

Section: Ordinal Load and Incidental Temporal Learning ! 22mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of ordinal load on incidental temporal learning

Silva

Petersson

Castro

2017

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can we grasp the temporal structure of events? A few studies have indicated that representations of temporal structure are acquired when there is an intention to learn, but not when learning is incidental. Response-to-stimulus intervals, uncorrelated temporal structures, unpredictable ordinal information, and lack of metrical organization have been pointed out as key obstacles to incidental temporal learning, but the literature includes piecemeal demonstrations of learning under all these circumstances. We suggest that the unacknowledged effects of ordinal load may help reconcile these conflicting findings, ordinal load referring to the cost of identifying the sequence of events (e.g., tones, locations) where a temporal pattern is embedded. In a first experiment, we manipulated ordinal load into simple and complex levels. Participants learned ordinal-simple sequences, despite their uncorrelated temporal structure and lack of metrical organization. They did not learn ordinal-complex sequences, even though there were no response-to-stimulus intervals nor unpredictable ordinal information. In a second experiment, we probed learning of ordinal-complex sequences with strong metrical organization, and again there was no learning. We conclude that ordinal load is a key obstacle to incidental temporal learning. Further analyses showed that the effect of ordinal load is to mask the expression of temporal knowledge, rather than to prevent learning

show abstract

“…More recently, Jiménez, Vaquero and Lupiáñez (2006) have shown that participants trained on an SRT task under intentional conditions, in which they were instructed to search for sequences, were able to transfer their sequence learning when the task's surface features were changed, while incidental learners were not. On the other hand, when the transfer test retained the surface features but involved a substantial reduction in the proportion of trials that were consistent with the sequence, incidental learners showed transfer of learning while intentional learners did not, presumably because the latter withheld expression of their sequence knowledge.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human sequence learning under incidental and intentional conditions.

Jones¹,

McLaren²

2009

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research explored the role that dissociable associative learning and hypothesis-testing processes may play in human sequence learning. Two two-choice SRT tasks were conducted, one under incidental conditions and the other under intentional conditions. In both cases an experimental group was trained on four sub-sequences (i.e. XXX, XYY, YYX and YXY). To control for sequential-effects, sequence learning was assayed by comparing their performance to a control group that had been trained on a pseudo-random ordering, during a test-phase in which both groups experienced effectively the same trial-order. Under incidental conditions participants demonstrated learning of the sub-sequences that ended in an alternation, but not of those that ended in a repetition. In contrast, under intentional conditions XXX showed the greatest evidence of learning. This dissociation is explained using a two-process model of learning, with an associative process (the Augmented SRN) capturing the incidental pattern, and a rule-based process explaining the advantage for XXX under intentional conditions. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

show abstract

Qualitative differences between implicit and explicit sequence learning.

Cited by 100 publications

References 38 publications

Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task

Perceptual sequence learning in a serial reaction time task

The effects of ordinal load on incidental temporal learning

Human sequence learning under incidental and intentional conditions.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About