AGL StimSelect: Software for automated selection of stimuli for artificial grammar learning

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 164-176

  Bailey, Todd M ^a,c   Pothos, Emmanuel M ^b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS;

ALGORITHMS; HUMANS; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LEARNING; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 43249107516     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BRM.40.1.164     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. ASHBY, F.G., ALFONSO-REESE, L. A., TURKEN, A. U., & WALDRON, E. M. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review, 105, 442-481.
2. BAILEY, T. M., & HAHN, U. (2001). Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or lexical neighborhoods? Journal of Memory & Language, 44, 568-591.
3. BERRY, D. C., & DIENES, Z. (1993). Implicit learning: Theoretical and empirical issues. Hove, U.K.: Erlbaum.
4. BOUCHER, L., & DIENES, Z. (2003). Two ways of learning associations. Cognitive Science, 27, 807-842.
5. BROOKS, L. R., & VOKEY, R. J. (1991). Abstract analogies and abstracted grammars: Comments on Reber (1989) and Mathews et al. (1989). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 316-323.
6. CABRERA, A. (1995). The "rational" number e: A functional analysis of categorization. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. CHOMSKY, N., & MILLER, G. A. (1958). Finite state languages. Information & Control, 1, 91-112.
8. DIENES, Z., & ALTMANN, G. (2003). Measuring learning using an untrained control group: Comment on R. Reber and Perruchet. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 117-123.
9. DIRLAM, D. K. (1972). Most efficient chunk sizes. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 355-359.
10. DULANY, D. E., CARLSON, R. A., & DEWEY, G. I. (1984). A case of syntactical learning and judgment: How conscious and how abstract? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 541-555.
11. HAHN, U., & BAILEY, T. M. (2005). What makes words sound similar? Cognition, 97, 227-267.
12. JOHNSTONE, T., & SHANKS, D. R. (1999). Two mechanisms in implicit grammar learning? Comment on Meulemans and van der Linden (1997). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Leaning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 524-531.
13. KNOWLTON, B. J., & SQUIRE, L. R. (1994). The information acquired during artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 79-91.
14. KNOWLTON, B. J., & SQUIRE, L. R. (1996). Artificial grammar learning depends on implicit acquisition of both abstract and exemplar-specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 169-181.
15. LUCE, P. A., & PISONI, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear & Hearing, 19, 1-36.
16. MEULEMANS, T., & VAN DER LINDEN, M. (1997). Associative chunk strength in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1007-1028.
17. MEULEMANS, T., & VAN DER LINDEN, M. (2003). Implicit learning of complex information in amnesia. Brain & Cognition, 52, 250-257.
18. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1988). Similarity, frequency, and category representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 54-65.
19. PERRUCHET, P., & PACTEAU, C. (1990). Synthetic grammar learning: Implicit rule abstraction or explicit fragmentary knowledge? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 264-275.
20. PERRUCHET, P., VINTER, A., PACTEAU, C., & GALLEGO, J. (2002). The formation of structurally relevant units in artificial grammar learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 485-503.
21. POLDRACK, R. A., CLARK, J., PARÉ- BLAGOEV, E. J., SHOHAMY, D., CRESO MOYANO, J., MYERS, C., & GLUCK, M. A. (2001). Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature, 414, 546-550.
22. POTHOS, E. M. (2005). The rules versus similarity distinction. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 28, 1-49.
23. POTHOS, E. M. (2007). Theories of artificial grammar learning. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 227-244.
24. POTHOS, E. M., & BAILEY, T. M. (2000). The importance of similarity in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 847-862.
25. POTHOS, E. M., & COX, W. M. (2002). Cognitive bias for alcohol-related information in inferential processes. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 66, 235-241.
26. POTHOS, E. M., & KIRK, J. (2004). Investigating learning deficits associated with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 10, 61-76.
27. REBER, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 6, 855-863.
28. REBER, A. S. (1976). Implicit learning of synthetic language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 2, 88-94.
29. REBER, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. REBER, A. S., & ALLEN, R. (1978). Analogic and abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning: A functional interpretation. Cognition, 6, 189-221.
31. REBER, P. J., & SQUIRE, L. R. (1999). Intact learning of artificial grammars and intact category learning by patients with Parkinson's disease. Behavioral Neuroscience, 113, 235-242.
32. REBER, R., & PERRUCHET, P. (2003). The use of control groups in artificial grammar learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 97-115.
33. REDINGTON, F. M., & CHATER, N. (1996). Transfer in artificial grammar learning: Methodological issues and theoretical implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 123-138.
34. SERVAN-SCHREIBER, E. (1991). The competitive chunking theory: Models of perception, learning, & memory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Carnegie-Mellon University.
35. SERVAN-SCHREIBER, E., & ANDERSON, J. R. (1990). Learning artificial grammars with competitive chunking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 592-608.
36. SHANKS, D. R. (2005). Implicit learning. In K. Lamberts and R. Goldstone (Eds.), Handbook of cognition (pp. 202-220). London: Sage.
37. SLOMAN, S. A., & RIPS, L. J. (1998). Similarity as an explanatory construct. Cognition, 65, 87-101.
38. SMITH, E. E., LANGSTON, C., & NISBETT, R. E. (1992). The case for rules in reasoning. Cognitive Science, 16, 1-40.
39. SMITH, E. E., PATALANO, A. L., & JONIDES, J. (1998). Alternative strategies of categorization. Cognition, 65, 167-196.
40. VOKEY, J. R., & BROOKS, L. R. (1992). Salience of item knowledge in learning artificial grammars. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 328-344.
41. WASSERMAN, E. A., & MILLER, R. R. (1997). What's elementary about associative learning? Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 573-607.
42. WITT, K., NUEHSMAN, A., & DEUSCHL, G. (2002). Intact artificial grammar learning in patients with cerebellar degeneration and advanced Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1534-1540.