A Multinomial Model to Assess Fluency and Recollection in a Sequence Learning Task

1997 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 631-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Buchner ◽  
Melanie C. Steffens ◽  
Edgar Erdfelder ◽  
Rainer Rothkegel
Keyword(s):  
Sequence Learning ◽  
Incidental Learning ◽  
Measurement Model ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Learning Condition ◽  
Auditory Event ◽  
Process Dissociation Procedure ◽  
Sequence Identification ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

We suggest that well-formedness judgements in conjunction with L.L. Jacoby's (1991) process dissociation procedure and an appropriate measurement model can be used to obtain measures of implicit and explicit sequence knowledge. We introduce a new measurement model designed specifically for the sequence learning task. The model assumes that sequence identification is based on recollection, perceptual or motor fluency, systematicity detection, and guessing. The model and the application of the process dissociation procedure were empirically evaluated using auditory event sequences. In Experiment 1, the parameter reflecting recollection was higher in an intentional than in an incidental learning condition. Experiment 2 showed that random sequences interspersed among the systematic sequences during the acquisition phase may change this pattern of results. A manipulation of processing fluency in Experiment 3 was reflected in the appropriate model parameter. In sum, the new measurement model and the application of the process dissociation procedure appear to be useful tools in sequence learning research.

scholarly journals Assumptions of the Process-Dissociation Procedure are Violated in Implicit Sequence Learning

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marius Barth ◽  
Christoph Stahl ◽  
Hilde Haider
Keyword(s):  
Sequence Learning ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Implicit Knowledge ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Implicit Sequence Learning ◽  
Generation Task ◽  
Accurate Performance ◽  
Exclusion Condition ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

In implicit sequence learning, a process-dissociation (PD) approach has been proposed to dissociate implicit and explicit learning processes. Applied to the popular generation task, participants perform two different task versions: inclusion instructions require generating the transitions that form the learned sequence; exclusion instructions require generating transitions other than those of the learned sequence. Whereas accurate performance under inclusion may be based on either implicit or explicit knowledge, avoiding to generate learned transitions requires controllable explicit sequence knowledge. The PD approach yields separate estimates of explicit and implicit knowledge that are derived from the same task; it therefore avoids many problems of previous measurement approaches. However, the PD approach rests on the critical assumption that the implicit and explicit processes are invariant across inclusion and exclusion conditions. We tested whether the invariance assumptions hold for the PD generation task. Across three studies using first-order as well as second-order regularities, invariance of the controlled process was found to be violated. In particular, despite extensive amounts of practice, explicit knowledge was not exhaustively expressed in the exclusion condition. We discuss the implications of these findings for the use of process-dissociation in assessing implicit knowledge.

Re-evaluating Dissociations between Implicit and Explicit Category Learning: An Event-related fMRI Study

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 1697-1709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd M. Gureckis ◽  
Thomas W. James ◽  
Robert M. Nosofsky
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Learning ◽  
Category Learning ◽  
Neural Activity ◽  
Incidental Learning ◽  
Brain Activity ◽  
Neural Systems ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Learning Condition ◽  
Perceptual Category Learning ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

Recent fMRI studies have found that distinct neural systems may mediate perceptual category learning under implicit and explicit learning conditions. In these previous studies, however, different stimulus-encoding processes may have been associated with implicit versus explicit learning. The present design was aimed at decoupling the influence of these factors on the recruitment of alternate neural systems. Consistent with previous reports, following incidental learning in a dot-pattern classification task, participants showed decreased neural activity in occipital visual cortex (extrastriate region V3, BA 19) in response to novel exemplars of a studied category compared to members of a foil category, but did not show this decreased neural activity following explicit learning. Crucially, however, our results show that this pattern was primarily modulated by aspects of the stimulus-encoding instructions provided at the time of study. In particular, when participants in an implicit learning condition were encouraged to evaluate the overall shape and configuration of the stimuli during study, we failed to find the pattern of brain activity that has been taken to be a signature of implicit learning, suggesting that activity in this area does not uniquely reflect implicit memory for perceptual categories but instead may reflect aspects of processing or perceptual encoding strategies.

The process dissociation procedure in sequence learning: 10 years of research

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinciane Gaillard ◽  
Arnaud Destrebecqz ◽  
Antoine Pasquali ◽  
Axel Cleeremans
Keyword(s):  
Sequence Learning ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Process Dissociation Procedure

An Investigation of Learning during Propofol Sedation and Anesthesia Using the Process Dissociation Procedure

2000 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. 1418-1425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare L. Stapleton ◽  
Jackie Andrade
Keyword(s):  
Explicit Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Word List ◽  
Process Dissociation ◽  
Process Dissociation Procedure ◽  
Completion Test ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Memory ◽  
Word Stem Completion ◽  
Implicit And Explicit

Background Many studies have shown that patients may remember words learned during apparently adequate anesthesia. Performance on memory tests may be influenced by explicit and implicit memory. We used the process dissociation procedure to estimate implicit and explicit memory for words presented during sedation or anesthesia. Methods We investigated intraoperative learning in 72 women undergoing pervaginal oocyte collection during propofol and alfentanil infusion. One word list was played once before infusion, another was played 10 times during surgery. Venous blood was taken for propofol assay at the end of the intraoperative list. Behavioral measures of anesthetic depth (eyelash reflex, hand squeeze response to command) were recorded and used to adjust the dose of anesthetic where clinically appropriate. On recovery, memory was assessed using an auditory word stem completion test with inclusion and exclusion instructions. Results The mean blood propofol concentration was 2.5 microg/ml (median, 2.3 microg/ml; range, 0.7-6.1 microg/ml). Mean alfentanil dose was 2.1 mg (median, 2.0 mg; range, 1.2-3.4 mg). Comparison of target and distractor hits in the inclusion condition showed memory for preoperative words only. However, the process dissociation procedure estimates showed explicit (mean, 0.18; P < 0.001) and implicit (mean, 0.05; P < 0.05) memory for the preoperative words, and a small amount of explicit memory for the intraoperative words (mean, 0.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.10). Memory performance did not differ between the 17 patients who consistently responded to command and eyelash reflex and the 32 patients who remained unresponsive. Blood propofol concentration and alfentanil dose did not correlate with memory for the intraoperative list. Conclusions There was no unprompted recall of surgery, but the process dissociation procedure showed memory for words presented during surgery. This memory was apparently explicit but did not correlate with the measures of depth of anesthesia used.

On the Role of Fragmentary Knowledge in a Sequence Learning Task

1998 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Buchner ◽  
Melanie C. Steffens ◽  
Rainer Rothkegel
Keyword(s):  
Sequence Learning ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Measurement Model ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Memory Processes ◽  
Learning Tasks ◽  
Considerable Debate ◽  
Adapted Process

There has been considerable debate about whether or not we need to distinguish between the acquisition of implicit—and, independently thereof, the acquisition of explicit—knowledge in sequence learning tasks. Proponents of the view that a unitary knowledge base is formed assume (a) that the knowledge acquired is explicitly available, and (b) that information about sequence fragments forms the core of this explicit knowledge. Both of these issues are addressed empirically in the present article. In two experiments, an adapted process dissociation procedure and a suitable measurement model were used to separate recollective (explicit) and fluency-based (implicit) memory processes in a sequence learning task. Experiment 1 demonstrated that fluency-based processes came into play much later than recollective processes. Such recollective processes have been conceptualized as being based on simple knowledge about sequence fragments or chunks. Indeed, Experiment 2 showed that recollective processes are more likely to contribute to sequence judgements if chunks are readily available at test than if they are not. Together, these results are in line with the view that the learning of an event systematicity can be conceived of as the memorization of chunks of events that support both the speeding up of reaction times to systematic events and explicit, recollective memory processes even after relatively little training.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document