Asymmetrical effects of control on the expression of implicit sequence learning
- PDF / 790,705 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 83 Downloads / 145 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Asymmetrical effects of control on the expression of implicit sequence learning Joaquín M. M. Vaquero1 · Juan Lupiáñez1 · Luis Jiménez2 Received: 27 March 2019 / Accepted: 22 June 2019 © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract As an automatic process, implicit learning effects have been characterized as inflexible and largely tied to the reinstatement of the acquisition context. However, implicit learning transfer has been observed under certain conditions, depending on the changes introduced between training and transfer. Here, we assess the hypothesis that transfer is specifically hindered by those changes that increase the control demands required by the orienting task with respect to those faced over training. Following on previous results by Jiménez et al. (J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cognit 32(3):475–490, 2006), which showed that the learning acquired over a standard serial reaction time task was not transferred to conditions requiring a more demanding search task, we explored the impact of symmetrical training and transfer conditions, and showed that sequence learning survived such transfer. Four additional experiments designed to assess transfer to either lower or higher control demands confirmed that the expression of learning was selectively hindered by those transfer conditions requiring higher levels of control demands. The results illustrate how implicit sequence learning can be indirectly subjected to cognitive control.
Introduction
Transfer in implicit sequence learning
Implicit learning is typically defined as the acquisition of knowledge that takes place independently of conscious attempts to learn and in such a way that the resulting knowledge is difficult to express (Berry & Dienes, 1993; Reber, 1993). As an automatic process, this form of learning has been characterized as inflexible (Dienes & Berry, 1997; Reber, Knowlton, & Squire, 1996) and largely tied to the overall reinstatement of the context in which it was acquired (Abrahamse & Verwey, 2008; Berry & Dienes, 1993, Cleeremans & Jiménez, 2002; Dienes & Berry, 1997; Reber et al., 1996; Song & Bédard, 2015). However, some studies have shown that implicit learning might be transferable under certain conditions (Abrahamse, Jiménez, Verwey, & Clegg, 2010).
Transfer of implicit learning has been most frequently addressed using the sequence learning paradigm developed by Nissen and Bullemer (1987). In the typical paradigm, participants are instructed to respond as fast and accurately as possible to a stimulus that appears on each trial at one of four possible locations marked on a computer screen, using a spatially consistent response key. Unknown to the participants, the successive locations follow a sequence that is continuously repeated over each practice block, and participants become progressively sensitive to this pattern, as attested by the slower responses produced when that regularity is removed. Transfer in sequence learning has been used as a tool to investigate the perceptual vs. motor
Data Loading...
