Varieties of implicit knowledge in a sequential RT task

Shanks, David R.; Johnstone, Theresa

doi:10.1037/e536982012-545

Cited by 11 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relative merits of these two accounts have been extensively researched over the last 20 years, and it has become clear that an explanation of implicit learning based solely on implicit rule abstraction has become increasingly difficult to justify (Gomez, 1997;Gomez & Schvaneveldt, 1994;Shanks & Johnstone, 1998;Vokey & Brooks, 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Well past midnight: Calling time on implicit invariant learning?

Newell¹,

Bright²

2002

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Well past midnight: Calling time on implicit invariant learning?

Newell¹,

Bright²

2002

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Altogether, these studies indicate that a single measure of awareness is unable to offer a precise assessment of the extent to which knowledge has been consciously acquired during a learning episode. Only a few studies, however, have systematically applied several awareness tests at the same time in order to measure correlations among those tasks or to show possible dissociations between them (e.g., Shanks and Johnstone, 1998;.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result there is little reason to believe that SRT tasks and awareness tests tap into different knowledge bases, and thus that implicit knowledge does not contribute to generation or recognition performance. Indeed, it has been shown that participants are able to reproduce the training sequence in a generation task even when they claim to guess the location of the next sequence element (Shanks and Johnstone, 1998). Furthermore, in a recognition task, subjects may tend to respond faster to old sequence fragments than to novel ones; recognition ratings may therefore reflect this improved feeling of perceptual and motor fluency rather than explicit recollection of the training material (see Perruchet and Amorim, 1992;Perruchet and Gallego, 1993;Willingham et al, 1993, for relevant discussion, Cohen and Curran, 1993).…”

Section: Forced-choice Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some results, however, suggest that this might not always be the case in sequence learning (Shanks and Johnstone, 1998;Perruchet et al, 1997). In the next section, we describe another methodological framework, which compares subjects' performance on 74 two tasks that differ only with respect to their instructions: this procedure makes it possible to circumvent this particular issue of sensitivity.…”

Section: Comparison Between Direct and Indirect Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many authors have therefore suggested that valid tests of awareness should involve forced-choice tasks such as recognition tasks. It has been argued that these are able to detect conscious knowledge left undetected by verbal reports or questionnaires (Willingham et al, 1989;Perruchet and Amorim, 1992;Frensch et al, 1994;Shanks and St. John, 1994;Shanks and Johnstone, 1998;Shanks and Johnstone, 1999).…”

Section: Verbal Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Methods for studying unconscious learning

Destrebecqz

Peigneux

2005

Progress in Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Striatum forever, despite sequence learning variability: A random effect analysis of PET data

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This PET study is concerned with the what, where, and how of implicit sequence learning. In contrast with previous studies imaging the serial reaction time (SRT) task, the sequence of successive locations was determined by a probabilistic finite‐state grammar. The implicit acquisition of statistical relationships between serially ordered elements (i.e., what) was studied scan by scan, aiming to evidence the brain areas (i.e., where) specifically involved in the implicit processing of this core component of sequential higher‐order knowledge. As behavioural results demonstrate between‐ and within‐subjects variability in the implicit acquisition of sequential knowledge through practice, functional PET data were modelled using a random‐effect model analysis (i.e., how) to account for both sources of behavioural variability. First, two mean condition images were created per subject depending on the presence or not of implicit sequential knowledge at the time of each of the 12 scans. Next, direct comparison of these mean condition images provided the brain areas involved in sequential knowledge processing. Using this approach, we have shown that the striatum is involved in more than simple pairwise associations and that it has the capacity to process higher‐order knowledge. We suggest that the striatum is not only involved in the implicit automatization of serial information through prefrontal cortex‐caudate nucleus networks, but also that it plays a significant role for the selection of the most appropriate responses in the context created by both the current and previous stimuli, thus contributing to better efficiency and faster response preparation in the SRT task. Hum. Brain Mapping 10:179–194, 2000. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Varieties of implicit knowledge in a sequential RT task

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Well past midnight: Calling time on implicit invariant learning?

Well past midnight: Calling time on implicit invariant learning?

Methods for studying unconscious learning

Striatum forever, despite sequence learning variability: A random effect analysis of PET data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About