Rules vs. Statistics in Implicit Learning of Biconditional Grammars
| Abstract | A significant part of everyday learning occurs incidentally — a process typically described as implicit learning. A central issue in this domain and others, such as language acquisition, is the extent to which performance depends on the acquisition and deployment of abstract rules. Shanks and colleagues [22], [11] have suggested (1) that discrimination between grammatical and ungrammatical instances of a biconditional grammar requires the acquisition and use of abstract rules, and (2) that training conditions — in particular whether instructions orient participants to identify the relevant rules or not — strongly influence the extent to which such rules will be learned. In this paper, we show (1) that a Simple Recurrent Network can in fact, under some conditions, learn a biconditional grammar, (2) that training conditions indeed influence learning in simple auto-associators networks and (3) that such networks can likewise learn about biconditional grammars, albeit to a lesser extent than human participants. These findings suggest that mastering biconditional grammars does not require the acquisition of abstract rules to the extent implied by Shanks and colleagues, and that performance on such material may in fact be based, at least in part, on simple associative learning mechanisms. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesAxel 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.
Pascal Wagner-Egger (2007). Conditional Reasoning and the Wason Selection Task: Biconditional Interpretation Instead of Reasoning Bias. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (4):484 – 505.
Peter Robinson (2005). Rules and Similarity Processes in Artificial Grammar and Natural Second Language Learning: What is the “Default”? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):32-33.
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.
Emmanuel M. Pothos (2005). The Rules Versus Similarity Distinction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):1-14.
Alexander Clark & Shalom Lappin (2013). Complexity in Language Acquisition. Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):89-110.
Richard E. Nisbett (ed.) (1993). Rules for Reasoning. L. Erlbaum Associates.
Domenic Berducci (2010). Teaching, Learning, Describing, and Judging Via Wittgensteinian Rules: Connections to Community. Human Studies 33 (4):445-463.
Kuo-Chin Chang, Tzung-Pei Hong & Shian-Shyong Tseng (1996). Machine Learning by Imitating Human Learning. Minds and Machines 6 (2):203-228.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-12-22Total downloads2 ( #232,684 of 549,700 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,700 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
