Beyond dissociation logic: evidence for controlled and automatic influences in artificial grammar learning
Beyond dissociation logic: evidence for controlled and automatic influences in artificial grammar learning
Evidence for unconscious learning has typically been based on dissociations between direct and indirect tests of learning. Because of some inherent problems with dissociation logic, we applied the logic of opposition to 2 artificial grammar learning experiments. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to 2 different sets of letter strings, generated from 2 different grammars, and later rated test strings for grammaticality with either in-concert (rate grammatical strings consistent with either structure) or opposition (rate grammatical only strings from 1 of the structures) instructions. Manipulating response deadline affected controlled, but not automatic influences. In Experiment 2, after similar training, a source-monitoring test was administered from which the in-concert and opposition conditions were derived. The test indicated that varying the retention interval affected controlled, but not automatic, influences. The results are discussed in terms of awareness, knowledge representation, and metacognitive processing.
457-470
Higham, P.A.
4093b28f-7d58-4d18-89d4-021792e418e7
Vokey, J.R.
c9f05491-3bb4-4c77-ba59-7b597ef71043
Pritchard, L.J.
5fcdc8cd-e388-41f6-9533-8191b985b10d
2000
Higham, P.A.
4093b28f-7d58-4d18-89d4-021792e418e7
Vokey, J.R.
c9f05491-3bb4-4c77-ba59-7b597ef71043
Pritchard, L.J.
5fcdc8cd-e388-41f6-9533-8191b985b10d
Higham, P.A., Vokey, J.R. and Pritchard, L.J.
(2000)
Beyond dissociation logic: evidence for controlled and automatic influences in artificial grammar learning.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129 (4), .
Abstract
Evidence for unconscious learning has typically been based on dissociations between direct and indirect tests of learning. Because of some inherent problems with dissociation logic, we applied the logic of opposition to 2 artificial grammar learning experiments. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to 2 different sets of letter strings, generated from 2 different grammars, and later rated test strings for grammaticality with either in-concert (rate grammatical strings consistent with either structure) or opposition (rate grammatical only strings from 1 of the structures) instructions. Manipulating response deadline affected controlled, but not automatic influences. In Experiment 2, after similar training, a source-monitoring test was administered from which the in-concert and opposition conditions were derived. The test indicated that varying the retention interval affected controlled, but not automatic, influences. The results are discussed in terms of awareness, knowledge representation, and metacognitive processing.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 2000
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 18326
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/18326
ISSN: 0096-3445
PURE UUID: 956e804a-668c-4462-ba59-0356d738f75b
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 13 Jan 2006
Last modified: 09 Jan 2022 03:05
Export record
Contributors
Author:
J.R. Vokey
Author:
L.J. Pritchard
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics