Implicit versus Explicit Learning Processes in a Probabilistic, Continuous Fine-Motor Catching Task

Green, Thomas D.; Flowers, John H.

doi:10.1080/00222895.1991.9942040

Cited by 80 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some investigators report beneficial effects of explicit information on implicit motor learning (Curran and Keele 1993;Boyd and Winstein 2001), others detrimental effects (Reber 1976;Green and Flowers 1991), and others little consequence (Reber and Squire 1998;Shea et al 2001). These seemingly contradictory findings may result from combined factors such as task differences, the type, timing and salience of explicit information, and participant characteristics.…”

Section: Influence Of Explicit Information On Implicit Learningmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…It cannot be assumed that the mixing of explicit and implicit is always helpful, and it appears that after basal ganglia stroke it is at least temporarily harmful. Our demonstration of a detrimental effect of explicit instructions is not new (Reber 1976;Green and Flowers 1991;Curran and Keele 1993;Boyd and Winstein 2003), but rarely has this work been extended into populations with neurologic damage. Long-ago Bliss (1892) and subsequently Boder (1935) described interference effects of explicit instructions on motor learning (Bliss 1892;Boder 1935).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The influence of explicit information of implicit learning has been disparately reported in the scientific literature (Reber 1976;Green and Flowers 1991;Curran and Keele 1993;Reber and Squire 1998;Boyd andWinstein 2001, 2003;Shea et al 2001). Some investigators report beneficial effects of explicit information on implicit motor learning (Curran and Keele 1993;Boyd and Winstein 2001), others detrimental effects (Reber 1976;Green and Flowers 1991), and others little consequence (Reber and Squire 1998;Shea et al 2001).…”

Section: Influence Of Explicit Information On Implicit Learningmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Long-ago Bliss (1892) and subsequently Boder (1935) described interference effects of explicit instructions on motor learning (Bliss 1892;Boder 1935). Disrupted learning after the adoption of conscious, experimenter suggested strategies has been demonstrated for both motor skills (Green and Flowers 1991;Verdolini-Marston and Balota 1994;Shea and Wulf 1999) and cognitive learning (Reber 1976;Poldrack et al 2001). Pol- (2001) showed that during classification learning the implicit and explicit systems may compete with one another.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, very few (Vakil et al 2000;Boyd and Winstein 2003) have considered the impact of explicit information on implicit motor sequence learning after regional brain damage caused by stroke. Interestingly, evidence is accumulating that in some cases adoption of conscious strategies for movement disrupts motor learning (Reber 1976;Green and Flowers 1991;Verdolini-Marston and Balota 1994;Winstein et al 1996;Boyd and Winstein 2003).…”

Section: Influence Of Explicit Information On Implicit Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Providing Explicit Information Disrupts Implicit Motor Learning After Basal Ganglia Stroke

Boyd¹,

Winstein²

2004

Learn. Mem.

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite their purported neuroanatomic and functional isolation, empirical evidence suggests that sometimes conscious explicit processes can influence implicit motor skill learning. Our goal was to determine if the provision of explicit information affected implicit motor-sequence learning after damage to the basal ganglia. Individuals with stroke affecting the basal ganglia (BG) and healthy controls (HC) practiced a continuous implicit motor-sequencing task; half were provided with explicit information (EI) and half were not (No-EI). The focus of brain damage for both BG groups was in the putamen. All of the EI participants were at least explicitly aware of the repeating sequence. Across three days of practice, explicit information had a differential effect on the groups. Explicit information disrupted acquisition performance in participants with basal ganglia stroke but not healthy controls. By retention (day 4), a dissociation was apparent-explicit information hindered implicit learning in participants with basal ganglia lesions but aided healthy controls. It appears that after basal ganglia stroke explicit information is less helpful in the development of the motor plan than is discovering a motor solution using the implicit system alone. This may be due to the increased demand placed on working memory by explicit information. Thus, basal ganglia integrity may be a crucial factor in determining the efficacy of explicit information for implicit motor-sequence learning.Explicit learning and memory are neuroanatomically sub-served by discrete regions within the medial temporal lobe that support conscious recollection of events and facts. Because no single lesion completely eliminates the development of procedural memories (although many severely disrupt them) the identification of the particular neuroanatomic structures that mediate implicit memory is not entirely clear. Studies of individuals with local damage (Vakil et al. 2000) or degenerative disease (Doyon et al. 1997) demonstrate that the basal ganglia are one of the regions that support implicit motor-sequence learning.

show abstract