Cross-cultural differences in implicit learning of chunks versus symmetries

Ling, Xiaoli; Zheng, Li; Guo, Xin-Heng; Li, Shouxin; Song, Shiyu; Sun, Lining; Dienes, Zoltán

doi:10.1098/rsos.180469

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relevant behavioural and simulation results demonstrated that both surface and abstract structures can be captured by this dual process model, but abstract structures can be learned only explicitly. However, this is inconsistent with recent findings that people can implicitly acquire abstract structures ( Lin and Murray, 2013 ; Tanaka and Watanabe, 2014a , b , 2015 ; Huang et al, 2017 ; Fu et al, 2018 ; Ling et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 92%

“…Moreover, the present findings also helped account for the inconsistent findings about abstract learning and consciousness. Although more recent studies have provided new evidence that abstract learning can occur unconsciously ( Dienes et al, 2012 ; Kemeny and Meier, 2016 ; Huang et al, 2017 ; Ling et al, 2018 ), other studies supported that abstract knowledge can only be acquired consciously ( Shanks and St John, 1994 ; Dominey et al, 1998 ; Boyer et al, 2005 ; Cleeremans and Destrebecqz, 2005 ). According to our findings, this might be because the former studies used relatively simple abstract structures while the latter studies used more complex structures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Boyer et al (2005) also suggested that the core mechanism involved in sequence learning is statistical in nature and genuine rule-based knowledge is necessarily conscious. Nonetheless, more studies have recently provided new evidence that abstract relationships or concepts can be processed without awareness ( Gross and Greene, 2007 ; Dienes et al, 2012 ; Lin and Murray, 2013 ; Tanaka and Watanabe, 2014a , b , 2015 ; Huang et al, 2017 ; Ling et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Dual Simple Recurrent Network Model for Chunking and Abstract Processes in Sequence Learning

Wang

Feng

et al. 2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many studies have provided evidence that abstract knowledge can be acquired in artificial grammar learning, it remains unclear how abstract knowledge can be attained in sequence learning. To address this issue, we proposed a dual simple recurrent network (DSRN) model that includes a surface SRN encoding and predicting the surface properties of stimuli and an abstract SRN encoding and predicting the abstract properties of stimuli. The results of Simulations 1 and 2 showed that the DSRN model can account for learning effects in the serial reaction time (SRT) task under different conditions, and the manipulation of the contribution weight of each SRN accounted for the contribution of conscious and unconscious processes in inclusion and exclusion tests in previous studies. The results of human performance in Simulation 3 provided further evidence that people can implicitly learn both chunking and abstract knowledge in sequence learning, and the results of Simulation 3 confirmed that the DSRN model can account for how people implicitly acquire the two types of knowledge in sequence learning. These findings extend the learning ability of the SRN model and help understand how different types of knowledge can be acquired implicitly in sequence learning.

show abstract

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Dual Simple Recurrent Network Model for Chunking and Abstract Processes in Sequence Learning

Wang

Feng

et al. 2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fu, Dienes & Fu, 2010), symmetry learning (e.g. Jiang, Zhu, Guo, Ma, Yang & Dienes, 2012;Ling et al, 2018), second language learning (e.g. Paciorek & Williams, 2015;Rebuschat, 2013;Rogers, Revesz, & Rebuschat, 2016), probabilistic category learning (e.g., Kemény & Lukács, 2013), learning conjunctive rule sets (Neil & Higham, 2012), and learning multiple grammars (Wan, Dienes, & Fu, 2008;Norman, Scott, Price, Jones, & Dienes, in press).…”

Section: Subjective Measures Of Awareness In Implicit Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing the role of conscious and unconscious knowledge in evaluative conditioning

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to a change in liking of a conditioned stimulus (CS) subsequent to its repeated pairing with a valent stimulus (US). Two studies that bring new light on the highly debated question of the role of awareness in EC were conducted. We developed an innovative method motivated by higher order and integration theories of consciousness to distinguish between the role of conscious and unconscious knowledge about the pairings. On each trial of the awareness test, participants had to indicate the valence of the US associated with a given CS and to make a 'structural knowledge attribution' by reporting the basis of their response. Valence identification accuracy was used to evaluate knowledge while the knowledge attribution was used to measure the conscious status of knowledge. Memory attribution indicated conscious knowledge about the pairings while feeling-based and random attributions indicated unconscious knowledge. A meta-analysis of the two studies revealed that valence identification accuracy was above chance level for memory and feelingbased attributions but not for the random attribution. EC was found in the three attributions. While EC effect size was medium for the memory attribution it was small for feeling-based and random attributions. Moreover, Experiment 2 included a delayed test. EC was still present 24 hours after the conditioning took place. The results obtained for memory and feeling-based attributions suggest that both conscious and unconscious knowledge may underlie EC. The results obtained for random attribution suggest that EC may also occur without any knowledge of US valence.

show abstract

“…This method has been most commonly applied in AGL, where it has shown that participants acquire, not only conscious, but also unconscious (structural) knowledge of the grammars, since they respond accurately when they rely on unconscious structural knowledge (Guess, Intuition, Familiarity) (e.g., Dienes & Scott, 2005;Norman & Price, 2012;Norman et al, 2016Norman et al, , 2019Scott & Dienes, 2008. Similar results with this method have been found in evaluative conditioning (Jurchis et al, 2020;Waroquier et al, 2020), implicit sequence learning (Fu et al, 2012(Fu et al, , 2018Zhang & Liu, 2021), language learning (e.g., Paciorek & Williams, 2015;Zhao et al, 2021), symmetry learning (Jiang et al, 2012;Ling et al, 2018), learning of conjunctive rules (Neil & Higham, 2012, or implicit social learning (Costea, 2018;Costea et al, 2020).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 75%

Unconscious Knowledge of Rewards Guides Instrumental Behaviors via Conscious Judgments

Jurchiș¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The demonstration of unconscious instrumental conditioning (i.e., unconsciously learning to choose stimuli that lead to rewards) is central for the tenet that unconscious learning supports human adaptation. Recent studies, using reliable subliminal conditioning procedures, have found evidence against unconscious instrumental conditioning. The present preregistered study proposes an alternative paradigm, in which unconscious processing is stimulated not by the subliminal exposure of the predictive (conditioned) stimuli, but by employing predictive regularities that are complex and difficult to detect consciously. Participants (N = 211) were exposed to letter strings that, unknown to them, were built from two complex artificial grammars: an “rewarded’’ or a “non-rewarded” grammar. On each trial, participants memorized a string, and subsequently had to discriminate the memorized string from a distractor. Correct discriminations were rewarded only when the identified string followed the rewarded grammar, but not when it followed the non-rewarded grammar. In a subsequent test phase, participants were presented with new strings from the rewarded and from the unrewarded grammar. Their task was now to directly choose the strings from the rewarded grammar, in order to collect more rewards. Employing a trial-by-trial awareness measure widely used in implicit learning, we found that participants accurately choose novel strings from the rewarded grammar when they had no conscious knowledge of the grammar. The awareness measure also showed that participants were accurate only when the unconsciously learned grammar led to conscious judgments. The present study provides an alternative to subliminal conditioning paradigms and shows evidence for unconscious instrumental conditioning.

show abstract

Cross-cultural differences in implicit learning of chunks versus symmetries

Cited by 12 publications

References 78 publications

A Dual Simple Recurrent Network Model for Chunking and Abstract Processes in Sequence Learning

A Dual Simple Recurrent Network Model for Chunking and Abstract Processes in Sequence Learning

Distinguishing the role of conscious and unconscious knowledge in evaluative conditioning

Unconscious Knowledge of Rewards Guides Instrumental Behaviors via Conscious Judgments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About