|Abstract||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 task in which the material is generated based on a probabilistic finite-state grammar (Cleeremans, 1993). We show (1) that subjects progressively learn about the statistical structure of the stimulus material over training with the choice reaction task, and (2) that they can use some of this knowledge to predict the location of the next stimulus in a subsequent explicit prediction task. However, detailed partial correlational analyses of the correspondence between CRT performance and the conditional probability of each stimulus showed that large effects remained even when controlling for explicit knowledge as assessed by the prediction task. Hence we conclude (1) that at least some of the knowledge expressed in CRT 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..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Luis Jimenez, Castor Mendez & Axel Cleeremans (1996). Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Sequence Learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 22 (4):948-969.
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).
Philip M. Merikle & Eyal M. Reingold (1991). Comparing Direct (Explicit) to Indirect (Implicit) Measures to Study Unconscious Memory. Journal Of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory And Cognition 17 (2):224-233.
L. JimC)nez, C. MC)ndez & Axel Cleeremans (1996). Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Implicit Learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Arnaud Destrebecqz & Axel Cleeremans (2001). Can Sequence Learning Be Implicit? New Evidence with the Process Dissociation Procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8 (2):343-350.
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.
Axel Cleeremans (1993). Mechanisms of Implicit Learning: Connectionist Models of Sequence Processing. MIT Press.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads11 ( #107,306 of 722,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,273 of 722,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?