Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 1/2012

01-01-2012 | Original Article

Selective learning enabled by intention to learn in sequence learning

Auteur: Kaori Miyawaki

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 1/2012

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

This study investigated whether a target sequence that people intend to learn is learned selectively when it is interleaved with another (non-target) sequence. Three experiments used a serial reaction time task in which different spatial and color stimuli occurred alternately. Each of the two interleaved sequences had structural regularity. Participants in an intentional learning group were instructed to learn the target (spatial) sequence whereas those in an incidental learning group were not. In Experiments 1 and 2 spatial and color sequences were correlated. Results showed that the intentional group learned the spatial sequence better than the incidental group and learned it independently of the color sequence, whereas the incidental group learned the two sequences as a combined sequence. In Experiment 3 the sequences were uncorrelated. Results showed that the intentional group was no longer superior in learning the spatial sequence. Findings indicate that the intention to learn a target sequence enables selective learning of it only when it is correlated with a non-target sequence.
Voetnoten
1
As can be seen from Fig. 3, pronounced RT differences appeared in the intentional group between probable and improbable trials in Block 7, but this group showed only minor RT differences in other blocks. The reason for this result is not clear because no procedural differences distinguished Block 7 from other blocks. As a result of a three-way ANOVA (group × trial type × block) on RTs (excluding those of Block7), only a main effect of block was significant [F(6,156) = 12.16, MSe = 28,34.54, p < 0.01], and neither an effect of trial type nor interactions between trial type and the other factors reached significance [F(1,26) = 3.65, MSe = 16,87.35, p = 0.07 for trial type; F(1,26) = 0.58, MSe = 16,87.35, p = 0.45 for trial type × group; F(6,156) = 0.77, MSe = 10,02.74, p = 0.60 for trial type × block; F(6,156) = 1.33, MSe = 10,02.74, p = 0.25 for group × trial type × block]. Thus, exclusion of Block 7 data reveals no reliable learning effect of the spatial sequence in Experiment 3.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Berner, M. P., & Hoffmann, J. (2009). Integrated and independent learning of hand-related constituent sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 890–904.PubMedCrossRef Berner, M. P., & Hoffmann, J. (2009). Integrated and independent learning of hand-related constituent sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 890–904.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2007). Incidental task sequence learning: Perceptual rather than conceptual? Psychological Research, 71, 140–151.PubMedCrossRef Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2007). Incidental task sequence learning: Perceptual rather than conceptual? Psychological Research, 71, 140–151.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Cohen, A., Ivry, R., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.CrossRef Cohen, A., Ivry, R., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.CrossRef
go back to reference French, R. M., & Cleeremans, A. (2002). Implicit learning and consciousness: An empirical, philosophical, and computational consensus in the making. Hove: Psychology Press. French, R. M., & Cleeremans, A. (2002). Implicit learning and consciousness: An empirical, philosophical, and computational consensus in the making. Hove: Psychology Press.
go back to reference Frensch, P. A., Lin, J., & Buchner, A. (1998). Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tone-counting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction task. Psychological Research, 61, 83–98.CrossRef Frensch, P. A., Lin, J., & Buchner, A. (1998). Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tone-counting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction task. Psychological Research, 61, 83–98.CrossRef
go back to reference Frensch, P. A., Wenke, D., & Rünger, D. (1999). A secondary tone-counting task suppresses expression of knowledge in the serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 260–274.CrossRef Frensch, P. A., Wenke, D., & Rünger, D. (1999). A secondary tone-counting task suppresses expression of knowledge in the serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 260–274.CrossRef
go back to reference Hayes, N. A., & Broadbent, D. E. (1988). Two modes of learning for interactive tasks. Cognition, 28, 249–276.PubMedCrossRef Hayes, N. A., & Broadbent, D. E. (1988). Two modes of learning for interactive tasks. Cognition, 28, 249–276.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Howard, J. H., Jr., & Howard, D. V. (1997). Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns. Psychology and Aging, 12, 634–656.PubMedCrossRef Howard, J. H., Jr., & Howard, D. V. (1997). Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns. Psychology and Aging, 12, 634–656.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Howard, D. V., & Howard, J. H., Jr. (2001). When it does hurt to try: Adult age differences in the effects of instructions on implicit pattern learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 798–805.CrossRef Howard, D. V., & Howard, J. H., Jr. (2001). When it does hurt to try: Adult age differences in the effects of instructions on implicit pattern learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 798–805.CrossRef
go back to reference Jiménez, L. (2003a). Attention and implicit learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Jiménez, L. (2003a). Attention and implicit learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
go back to reference Jiménez, L. (2003b). Intention, attention, and consciousness in probabilistic sequence learning. In L. Jiménez (Ed.) Attention and implicit learning (pp. 43–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Jiménez, L. (2003b). Intention, attention, and consciousness in probabilistic sequence learning. In L. Jiménez (Ed.) Attention and implicit learning (pp. 43–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
go back to reference Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 236–259.CrossRef Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 236–259.CrossRef
go back to reference Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (2001). Implicit sequence learning with competing explicit cues. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 345–369. Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (2001). Implicit sequence learning with competing explicit cues. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 345–369.
go back to reference Keele, S. W., Ivry, R., Mayr, U., Hazeltine, E., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 110, 316–339.PubMedCrossRef Keele, S. W., Ivry, R., Mayr, U., Hazeltine, E., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 110, 316–339.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 350–364.PubMedCrossRef Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 350–364.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Meier, B., & Cock, J. (2010). Are correlated streams of information necessary for implicit sequence learning? Acta Psychologica, 133, 17–27.PubMedCrossRef Meier, B., & Cock, J. (2010). Are correlated streams of information necessary for implicit sequence learning? Acta Psychologica, 133, 17–27.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Nissen, M. J., & Bullmer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.CrossRef Nissen, M. J., & Bullmer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.CrossRef
go back to reference Perruchet, P., & Vinter, A. (2002). The self-organising consciousness: A framework for implicit learning. In R. M. French & A. Cleeremans (Eds.), Implicit learning and consciousness: An empirical, philosophical, and computational consensus in the making (pp. 41–67). Hove: Psychology Press. Perruchet, P., & Vinter, A. (2002). The self-organising consciousness: A framework for implicit learning. In R. M. French & A. Cleeremans (Eds.), Implicit learning and consciousness: An empirical, philosophical, and computational consensus in the making (pp. 41–67). Hove: Psychology Press.
go back to reference Rah, S. K.-Y., Reber, A. S., & Hsiao, A. T. (2000). Another wrinkle on the dual-task SRT experiment: It’s probably not dual task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 309–313.CrossRef Rah, S. K.-Y., Reber, A. S., & Hsiao, A. T. (2000). Another wrinkle on the dual-task SRT experiment: It’s probably not dual task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 309–313.CrossRef
go back to reference Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 585–594.CrossRef Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 585–594.CrossRef
go back to reference Rowland, L. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2006a). Attention modulates the learning of multiple contingencies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 643–648.CrossRef Rowland, L. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2006a). Attention modulates the learning of multiple contingencies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 643–648.CrossRef
go back to reference Rowland, L. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2006b). Sequence learning and selection difficulty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 287–299.PubMedCrossRef Rowland, L. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2006b). Sequence learning and selection difficulty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 287–299.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as a factor in secondry-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53–71.CrossRef Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as a factor in secondry-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53–71.CrossRef
go back to reference Schvaneveldt, R. W., & Gomez, R. L. (1998). Attention and probabilistic sequence learning. Psychological Research, 61, 175–190.CrossRef Schvaneveldt, R. W., & Gomez, R. L. (1998). Attention and probabilistic sequence learning. Psychological Research, 61, 175–190.CrossRef
go back to reference Weiermann, B., Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2010). What matters in implicit task sequence learning: Perceptual stimulus features, task sets, or correlated streams of information? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1492–1509.PubMedCrossRef Weiermann, B., Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2010). What matters in implicit task sequence learning: Perceptual stimulus features, task sets, or correlated streams of information? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1492–1509.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Willingham, D. B., Greenberg, A. R., & Thomas, R. C. (1997). Response-to-stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning, but does affect performance. Memory & Cognition, 25, 534–542.CrossRef Willingham, D. B., Greenberg, A. R., & Thomas, R. C. (1997). Response-to-stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning, but does affect performance. Memory & Cognition, 25, 534–542.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Selective learning enabled by intention to learn in sequence learning
Auteur
Kaori Miyawaki
Publicatiedatum
01-01-2012
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0325-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2012

Psychological Research 1/2012 Naar de uitgave