David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Comparing the relative sensitivity of direct and indirect measures of learning is proposed as the best way to provide evidence for unconscious learning when both conceptual and operative definitions of awareness are lacking. This approach was first proposed by Reingold & Merikle (1988) in the context of subliminal perception. In this paper, we apply it to a choice reaction time task in which the material is generated based on a probabilistic finite-state grammar (Cleeremans, 1993). We show (1) that participants progressively learn about the statistical structure of the stimulus material over training with the choice reaction time task, and (2) that they can use some of this knowledge to predict the location of the next stimulus in a subsequent “generation” task. However, detailed partial correlational analyses of the correspondence between performance during the reaction time task and the statistical structure of the training material showed that large effects remained even when controlling for explicit knowledge as assessed by the generation task. Hence we conclude (1) that at least some of the knowledge expressed through reaction time performance can not be characterized as conscious, and (2) that even when associations are found at a global level of analysis, dissociations can still be obtained when more detailed analyses are conducted. Finally, we also show that participants are limited in the depth of the contingencies they can learn about, and that these limitations are shared by the Simple Recurrent Network model of Cleeremans & McClelland (1991).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
L. JimC)nez, C. MC)ndez & Axel Cleeremans (1996). Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Implicit Learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Axel Cleeremans & L. JimC)nez (1998). Implicit Sequence Learning: The Truth is in the Details. In Michael A. Stadler & Peter A. Frensch (eds.), Handbook of Implicit Learning. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Muriel Vandenberghe, Nicolas Schmidt, Patrick Fery & Axel Cleeremans (2006). Can Amnesic Patients Learn Without Awareness? New Evidence Comparing Deterministic and Probabilistic Sequence Learning. Neuropsychologia 44 (10):1629-1641.
Georgina Jackson & Stephen Jackson (1995). Do Measures of Explicit Learning Actually Measure What is Being Learnt in the Serial Reaction Time Task? Psyche 2 (20).
Axel Cleeremans & Luis Jiménez (1994). Direct and Indirect Measures of Implicit Learning. In Ashwin Ram & Kurt Eiselt (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Erlbaum 445--450.
Luis Jimenez, Castor Mendez & Axel Cleeremans (1996). Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Sequence Learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 22 (4):948-969.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #224,658 of 1,911,838 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,984 of 1,911,838 )
How can I increase my downloads?