Abstract
This experiment investigated whether subjects' selection and use of strategies in detecting a target letter in a flanker task requires intention. Subjects' expectancies for compatible and incompatible trials (trials on which the response to the flanker stimulus was consistent or inconsistent with the target response) were manipulated by presenting cues that signaled the occurrence of these types of trials. Three groups of subjects received explicit, partially explicit, or implicit instructions about the meaning of the cues. By the end of the experiment, all the groups were able to select and use strategies based on the cues to improve their performance. However, this strategy selection developed slowly with practice in the latter two groups, whereas it was present from the outset in the first group. In addition, forced choice tests performed after the experiment showed that the subjects in the implicit condition could not intentionally indicate which stimuli were most likely to follow a given cue. Thus, the data suggest that the selection of strategies occurred outside the subjects' awareness, and without their intention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blais, C., Robidoux, S., Risko, E. F., &Besner, D. (2007). Itemspecific adaptation and the conflict- monitoring hypothesis: A computational model.Psychological Review,114, 1076–1086.
Borgmann, K. W. U., Risko, E. F., Stolz, J. A., &Besner, D. (2007). Simon says: Reliability and the role of working memory and attentional control in the Simon task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,14, 313–319.
Braver, T. S., &Cohen, J. D. (2001). Working memory, cognitive control, and the prefrontal cortex: Computational and empirical studies.Cognitive Processing,2, 25–55.
Carlson, K. A., &Flowers, J. H. (1996). Intentional versus unintentional use of contingencies between perceptual events.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 460–470.
Cheesman, J., &Merikle, P. M. (1984). Priming with and without awareness.Perception & Psychophysics,36, 387–395.
Coles, M. G. H., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., &Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 529–553.
Corballis, P. M., &Gratton, G. (2003). Independent control of processing strategies for different locations in the visual field.Biological Psychology,64, 191–209.
Crump, M. J. C., &Milliken, B. (2009). The flexibility of contextspecific control: Evidence for context-driven generalization of itemspecific control settings.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,62, 1523–1532.
Crump, M. J. C., Vaquero, J. M., &Milliken, B. (2008). Contextspecific learning and control: The roles of awareness, task relevance, and relative salience.Consciousness & Cognition,17, 22–36.
Eriksen, B. A., &Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 143–149.
Gabrieli, J. D. E., Cohen, N. J., &Corkin, S. (1988). The impaired learning of semantic knowledge following bilateral medial temporallobe resection.Brain & Cognition,7, 157–177.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., &Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 480–506.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., Sirevaag, E. J., Eriksen, C. W., &Donchin, E. (1988). Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: A psychophysiological analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 331–344.
Jacoby, L. L., Lindsay, D. S., &Hessels, S. (2003). Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 638–644.
Jacoby, L. L., McElree, B., &Trainham, T. N. (1999). Automatic influences as accessibility bias in memory and Stroop tasks: Toward a formal model. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.),Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance. Interaction of theory and application (pp. 461–486). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kunde, W. (2003). Sequential modulations of stimulus-response correspondence effects depend on awareness of response conflict.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 198–205.
Kunde, W. (2004). Response priming by supraliminal and subliminal action effects.Psychological Research,68, 91–96.
Kunde, W., &Wühr, P. (2006). Sequential modulations of corresponding effects across spatial dimensions and tasks.Memory & Cognition,34, 356–367.
Logan, G. D., &Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task.Memory & Cognition,7, 166–174.
Logan, G. D., &Zbrodoff, N. J. (1982). Constraints on strategy construction in a speeded discrimination task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,8, 502–520.
Mayr, U., Awh, E., &Laurey, P. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control.Nature Neuroscience,6, 450–452.
Miller, J. (1987). Evidence of preliminary response preparation from a divided attention task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 425–434.
Näätänen, R. (1982). Processing negativity: An evoked-potential reflection.Psychological Bulletin,92, 605–640.
Notebaert, W., &Verguts, T. (2006). Stimulus conflict predicts conflict adaptation in a numerical flanker task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 1078–1084.
Packard, M. G., &McGaugh, J. L. (1992). Double dissociation of fornix and caudate nucleus lesions on acquisition of two water maze tasks: Further evidence for multiple memory systems.Behavioral Neuroscience,106, 439–446.
Reingold, E. M., &Merikle, P. M. (1988). Using direct and indirect measures to study perception without awareness.Perception & Psychophysics,44, 563–575.
Schmidt, J. R., Crump, M. J. C., Cheesman, J., &Besner, D. (2007). Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control.Consciousness & Cognition,16, 421–435.
Stadler, M. A., Warren, J. L., &Lesch, S. L. (2000). Is there crossformat transfer in implicit invariance learning?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,53A, 235–245.
Szymanski, K. F., &MacLeod, C. M. (1996). Manipulation of attention at study affects an explicit but not an implicit test of memory.Consciousness & Cognition,5, 165–175.
Trainham, T. N., Lindsay, D. S., &Jacoby, L. L. (1997). Stroop process dissociations: Reply to Hillstrom and Logan (1997).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 1579–1587.
Verbruggen, F., Notebaert, W., Liefooghe, B., &Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Stimulus- and response-conflict-induced cognitive control in the flanker task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 328–333.
Verguts, T., &Notebaert, W. (2008). Hebbian learning of cognitive control: Dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation.Psychological Review,115, 518–525.
Weiskrantz, L. (2002). Prime-sight and blindsight.Consciousness & Cognition,11, 568–581.
Wühr, P., &Kunde, W. (2008). Precueing spatial S-R correspondence: Is there regulation of expected response conflict?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,34, 872–883.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Note—Accepted by the previous editorial team, when Brian H. Ross was Editor.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ghinescu, R., Schachtman, T.R., Stadler, M.A. et al. Strategic behavior without awareness? Effects of implicit learning in the Eriksen flanker paradigm. Memory & Cognition 38, 197–205 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.2.197
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.2.197