The Relation Between Implicit and Explicit Learning: Evidence for Parallel Development

1999 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 531-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel B. Willingham ◽  
Kelly Goedert-Eschmann
Keyword(s):  
Motor Skill ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Skill Learning ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Implicit System ◽  
Implicit Training ◽  
Explicit Training ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning ◽  
Sequencing Task

Much research has focused on the separability of implicit and explicit learning, but less has focused on how they might interact. A recent model suggests that in the motor-skill domain, explicit knowledge can guide movement, and the implicit system learns in parallel, based on these movements. Functional imaging studies do not support that contention, however; they indicate that learning is exclusively implicit or explicit. In the experiment reported here, participants learned a motor sequencing task either implicitly or explicitly. At transfer, most of the stimuli were random, but the sequence occasionally appeared; thus, it was not obvious that explicit knowledge could be applied to the task. Nevertheless, participants with explicit training showed sequence knowledge equivalent to those with implicit training, implying that implicit knowledge had been acquired in parallel with explicit knowledge. This result has implications for the development of automaticity and of motor-skill learning.

EPILOGUE

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 692-697
Author(s):  
Robert DeKeyser ◽  
Shaofeng Li
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Outcome Variable ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Language Aptitude ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Instruction Type ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

AbstractIn this commentary, we summarize the findings of the seven included studies that examined implicit language aptitude from various perspectives and highlight issues to be resolved in the validation of this new construct in second language research. We start by providing an overview of the contributions of the studies. We then identify the lack of convergent validity of the measures of implicit aptitude reported in the included studies and problematize the equally varied nature of the measurement of implicit knowledge—the outcome variable of aptitude research—and related concepts. In particular, by drawing on empirical evidence and theoretical claims, we attempt to clarify the relationships between implicit and explicit knowledge, implicit and explicit learning, and implicit and explicit instruction. Next, we draw attention to the interactions reported by the included studies between aptitude and outcome measures and between aptitude and instruction type, emphasizing the value and importance of interactional research. We conclude by making recommendations for future research.

Implicit versus explicit: An act-r learning perspective

1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 785-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels A. Taatgen
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Learning ◽  
Explicit Memory ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Cognitive Architecture ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Memory ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

Dienes & Perner propose a theory of implicit and explicit knowledge that is not entirely complete. It does not address many of the empirical issues, nor does it explain the difference between implicit and explicit learning. It does, however, provide a possible unified explanation, as opposed to the more binary theories like the systems and the processing theories of implicit and explicit memory. Furthermore, it is consistent with a theory in which implicit learning is viewed as based on the mechanisms of the cognitive architecture, and explicit learning as strategies that exploit these mechanisms.

scholarly journals TYPES OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 1645-1650
Author(s):  
Vesna Koceva
Keyword(s):  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Grammar Instruction ◽  
Paper Briefly ◽  
Implicit Instruction ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

This paper briefly presents a theoretical research conducted by revising an extensive relevant literature on this problematics, by separating, in our opinion, the most important definitions connected with explicit and implicit grammar instruction. The introduction gives a brief explanation of the difference between the implicit and explicit knowledge and learning. The paper further establishes the main differences between the implicit and explicit instruction by citing the positions of Ellis, Housen and Pierrard. A distinction is made between the indirect assistance or intervention i.e. indirect instruction which, in essence, is implicit as well as some implicit instruction. The paper continues with a discussion of Batstone's stance, who believes that the explicit and implicit instructions can only be defined in relation with the teacher or the creator of the teaching material, while the implicit and explicit learning refer to the student and there is no necessary relation between the two pairs of terms. The paper briefly mentions the claims of Norris and Ortega, Doughty and Robinson. The discussion continues with explanation of the types of explicit and implicit instruction, defining the terms reactive, proactive, direct, indirect, deductive, inductive, intensive and extensive grammar instruction. In the end, the paper briefly summarises the main definitions regarding explicit and implicit grammar instruction.

scholarly journals Competition between parallel sensorimotor learning systems

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott T. Albert ◽  
Jihoon Jang ◽  
Adrian M. Haith ◽  
Gonzalo Lerner ◽  
Valeria Della-Maggiore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Learning Systems ◽  
Sensorimotor Adaptation ◽  
Error Sources ◽  
Parallel Learning ◽  
Implicit System ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning ◽  
Visual Error ◽  
Response Errors

AbstractSensorimotor adaptation benefits from learning in two parallel systems: one that has access to explicit knowledge, and another that relies on implicit, unconscious correction. However, it is unclear how these systems interact: does enhancing one system’s contributions, for example through instruction, impair the other, or do they learn independently? Here we illustrate that certain contexts can lead to competition between implicit and explicit learning. In some cases, each system is responsive to a task-related visual error. This shared error appears to create competition between these systems, such that when the explicit system increases its response, errors are siphoned away from the implicit system, thus reducing its learning. This model suggests that explicit strategy can mask changes in implicit error sensitivity related to savings and interference. Other contexts suggest that the implicit system can respond to multiple error sources. When these error sources conflict, a second type of competition occurs. Thus, the data show that during sensorimotor adaptation, behavior is shaped by competition between parallel learning systems.

Implicit and explicit learning in schizophrenics treated with olanzapine and with classic neuroleptics

2002 ◽  
Vol 160 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Stevens ◽  
Jürgen Schwarz ◽  
Benedikt Schwarz ◽  
Ilona Ruf ◽  
Thomas Kolter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

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.

scholarly journals Are you mentoring or coaching? Definitions matter

2020 ◽  
pp. 096100062096665
Author(s):  
Lisa Hussey ◽  
Jennifer Campbell-Meier
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Research Question ◽  
The United States ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Explicit Learning ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Apply Theory ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Implicit And Explicit Learning

New library and information science professionals, without previous experience in information organizations, are often left adrift, unsure how to apply theory or best practice to a new work environment. To bridge this gap, mentoring and coaching opportunities are often employed (or mandated) to provide new practitioners with required skills, knowledge, or networking. There are opportunities to harness implicit and explicit learning through experiences and interactions through mentoring and coaching. Definitions of mentoring and coaching in the profession are often used interchangeably when discussing the growth and development of an individual. This leads to the following questions: How do librarians define both mentoring and coaching? How do mentoring and coaching relate to professional development? To address the research question, 47 semi-structured interviews were conducted with librarians in Canada, New Zealand, and the United States between 2015 and 2016. Participants were asked about their mentoring and coaching experiences. During the interviews, participants were asked questions about their experiences as a mentor or mentee. In addition, participants were asked to define both “mentoring” and “coaching.” The authors used an inductive approach to data analysis, and interviews were coded by category.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document