Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Different studies have shown that action–effect associations seem to enhance implicit learning of motor sequences. In a recent study (Haider et al., Conscious Cognit 26:145–161, 2014), we found indications that action–effect learning might play a special role in acquiring explicit knowledge within an implicit learning situation. The current study aims at directly manipulating the action–effect contingencies in a Serial Reaction Time Task and examining its impact on explicit sequence knowledge. For this purpose, we created a situation in which the participants’ responses led to a melodic tone sequence. For one group, these effect tones were contingently bound to the sequential responses and immediately followed the key press; for the second group, the tones were delayed by 400 ms. For a third group, the tones also followed the response immediately and resulted in the same melody but were not contingently bound to the responses. A fourth control group received no effect tones at all. Only the group that experienced contingent effect tones that directly followed the response showed an increase in explicit sequence knowledge. The results are discussed in terms of the multi-modal structure of action–effect associations and the ideomotor principle of action control.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Abrahamse, E. L., van der Lubbe, R. H. J., Verwey, W. B., Szumska, I., & Jaśkowski, P. (2012). Redundant sensory information does not enhance sequence learning in the serial reaction time task. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 8(2), 109–120. doi: 10.2478/v10053-008-0108-y. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Baars, B. J. (1997). In the theatre of consciousness: Global workspace theory, a rigorous scientific theory of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4(4), 292–309.
Blakemore, S. J., Wolpert, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (2002). Abnormalties in the awareness of action. Trends in Cognitive Science, 6(6), 237–242. CrossRef
Cleeremans, A. (2011). The radical plasticity thesis: How the brain learns to be conscious. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 86. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00086.
Cleeremans, A., & Jiménez, L. (2002). Implicit learning and consciousness: A graded, dynamic perspective. In R. M. French & A. Cleeremans (Eds.), Implicit Learning and Consciousness: An Empirical, Computational and Philosophical Consensus in the Making? (pp. 1–40). Hove: Psychology Press.
Destrebecqz, A., & Cleeremans, A. (2001). Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 391–398. doi: 10.3758/BF03196171.
Dienes, Z. (2008). Subjective measures of unconscious knowledge. In R. Banerjee, B. K. Chakrabarti (Eds.), Models of Brain and Mind Physical, Computational and Psychological Approaches (pp. 49–64). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Donohue, S. E., Roberts, K. C., Grent-‘t-Jong, T., & Woldorff, M. (2011). The cross-modal spread of attention reveals differential constraints for the temporal and spatial linking of visual and auditory stimulus events. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(22), 7982–7990. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5298-10.2011. CrossRefPubMed
Eberhardt, K., Esser, S., & Haider, H. (2017). Abstract feature codes: The building blocks of the implicit learning system. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000380.
Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(1), 229–240. doi: 10.1037/0096-15188.8.131.52.
Frensch, P. A., Haider, H., Rünger, D., Neugebauer, U., Voigt, S., & Werg, J. (2003). The route from implicit learning to awareness of what has been learned. In L. Jiménez (Ed.), Attention and Implicit Learning (pp. 335–366). New York: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossRef
Haggard, P., Clark, S., & Kalogeras, J. (2002). Voluntary action and conscious awareness. Nature: Neursoscience, 5(4), 382–385. doi: 10.1038/nn827.
Herwig, A., & Waszak, F. (2012). Action–effect bindings and ideomotor learning in intention- and stimulus-based actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(444), 1–18. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00444.
Hommel, B. (2017). Conscious and unconscious control of spatial action. Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.05929-0.
James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Holt & Co.
Jeffreys, H. (1939). A Theory of Probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Keele, S. W., Ivry, R., Mayr, U., Hazeltine, E., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 110, 352–339.
Lau, H. (2008). A higher-order Bayesian decision theory of consciousness. In R. Banerjee & B. K. Chakrabarti (Eds.), Models of Brain and Mind: Physical, Computational and Psychological Approaches (pp. 35–48). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Lotze, R. H. (1852). Medizinische Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele. Leipzig: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32. CrossRef
Rosenthal, D. (1997). A theory of consciousness. In N. Block, O. Flanagan, & G. Güzeldere (Eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates (pp. 729–753). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Shanks, D. R. (2005). Implicit Learning. In K. Lamberts & R. Goldstone (Eds.), Handbook of Cognition (pp. 202–220). London: Sage.
Willingham, D. B., Wells, L. A., Farrell, J. M., & Stemwedel, M. E. (2000). Implicit motor sequence learning represented in response locations. Memory & Cognition, 28(3), 366–375. CrossRef
Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(4), 962–978. CrossRef
- Action–effects enhance explicit sequential learning
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg