Implicit sequence learning is represented by stimulus-response rules

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 677-688

  Schwarb, Hillary ^a   Schumacher, Eric H ^a  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; HUMAN; LEARNING; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT;

ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE OF RESULTS (PSYCHOLOGY); ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SERIAL LEARNING; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 77957577833     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/MC.38.6.677     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Bischoff-Grethe, A., Goedert, K. M., Willingham, D. T., & Grafton, S. T. (2004). Neural substrates of response-based sequence learning using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 127-138. doi:10.1162/089892904322755610 (Pubitemid 38117592)
2. Cleeremans, A., Destrebecqz, A., & Boyer, M. (1998). Implicit learning: News from the front. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 406-416. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(98)01232-7 (Pubitemid 28461988)
3. Clegg, B. A. (2005). Stimulus-specific sequence representation in serial reaction time tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1087-1101. doi:10.1080/02724980443000485 (Pubitemid 41204956)
4. Clegg, B. A., DiGirolamo, G. J., & Keele, S. W. (1998). Sequence learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 275-281. doi:10.1016/ S1364-6613(98)01202-1209
5. Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 17-30. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.1.17
6. Cohen, N. J., & Eichenbaum, H. (1993). Memory, amnesia, and the hippocampal system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Curtis, C. E., & D'Esposito, M. (2003). Persistent activity in the prefrontal cortex during working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 415-423. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00197-9 (Pubitemid 37083479)
8. Deroost, N., & Soetens, E. (2006). The role of response selection in sequence learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 449-456. doi:10.1080/17470210500462684 (Pubitemid 43421115)
9. Duncan, J. (1977). Response selection rules in spatial choice reaction tasks. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 49-61). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Frensch, P. A., Buchner, A., & Lin, J. (1994). Implicit learning of unique and ambiguous serial transitions in the presence and absence of a distractor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 567-584. doi:10.1037/0278 -7393.20.3.567
11. Frensch, P. A., Wenke, D., & Runger, D. (1999). A secondary tonecounting task suppresses expression of knowledge in the serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 260-274. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.1.260
12. Goschke, T. (1998). Implicit learning of perceptual and motor sequences: Evidence for independent systems. In M. A. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 401-444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Grafton, S. T., Salidis, J., & Willingham, D. B. (2001). Motor learning of compatible and incompatible visuomotor maps. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 217-231. doi:10.1162/089892901564270 (Pubitemid 32209764)
14. Hazeltine, E. (2002). The representational nature of sequence learning: Evidence for goal-based codes. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 673-689). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Heuer, H., & Schmidtke, V. (1996). Secondary-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 59, 119-133. doi:10.1007/BF01792433
16. Howard, J. H., Mutter, S. A., & Howard, D. V. (1992). Serial pattern learning by event observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 1029-1039. doi:10.1037/0278 -7393.18.5.1029
17. Keele, S. W., Ivry, R., Mayr, U., Hazeltine, E., & Heuer, H. (2003). The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 110, 316-339. doi:10.1037/0033 -295X.110.2.316
18. Keele, S. W., Jennings, P., Jones, S., Caulton, D., & Cohen, A. (1995). On the modularity of sequence representation. Journal of Motor Behavior, 27, 17-30.
19. Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E., & Nizam, A. (1998). Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
20. Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2000). Patterns, chunks, and hierarchies in serial reaction-time tasks. Psychological Research, 63, 22-35. doi:10.1007/PL00008165
21. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270. doi:10.1037/0033 -295X.97.2.253
22. Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 350-364. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.2.350
23. Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167 (Pubitemid 32695227)
24. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1-32. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(87)90002-8
25. Olson, I. R., Rao, H., Moore, K. S., Wang, J., Detre, J. A., & Aguirre, G. K. (2006). Using perfusion fMRI to measure continuous changes in neural activity with learning. Brain & Cognition, 60, 262-271. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2005.11.010
26. Pashler, H. (1994). Overlapping mental operations in serial performance with preview. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 161-191. doi:10.1080/14640749408401148
27. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 1. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 20-32. doi:10.1037/0278 -7393.17.1.20
28. Read, L. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2004). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility and negative priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 41-48.
29. Reber, A. S., Allen, R., & Reber, P. J. (1999). Implicit versus explicit learning. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of cognition (pp. 475- 514). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Reed, J., & Johnson, P. (1994). Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 585-594. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.3.585
31. Remillard, G. (2003). Pure perceptual-based sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 581-597. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.29.4.581 (Pubitemid 37189459)
32. Remillard, G. (2009). Pure perceptual-based sequence learning: A role for visuospatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 35, 528-541. doi:10.1037/a0014646
33. Richard, M. V., Clegg, B. A., & Seger, C. A. (2009). Implicit motor sequence learning is not represented purely in response locations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1516-1522. doi:10.1080/17470210902732130
34. Rowe, J. B., Toni, I., Josephs, O., Frackowiak, R. S. J., & Passingham, R. E. (2000). The prefrontal cortex: Response selection or maintenance within working memory? Science, 288, 1656-1660. doi:10.1126/science. 288.5471.1656 (Pubitemid 30387434)
35. Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as a factor in secondary-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53-71. doi:10.1007/BF00419680
36. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
37. Schumacher, E. H., Cole, M. W., & D'Esposito, M. (2007). Selection and maintenance of stimulus-response rules during preparation and performance of a spatial choice-reaction task. Brain Research, 1136, 77-87. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.11.081 (Pubitemid 46209072)
38. Schumacher, E. H., & Schwarb, H. (2009). Parallel response selection disrupts sequence learning under dual-task conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 270-290. doi:10.1037/ a0015378
39. Schwarb, H., & Schumacher, E. H. (2009). Neural evidence of a role for spatial response selection in the learning of spatial sequences. Brain Research, 1247, 114-125. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2008.09.097
40. Shanks, D. R., & Channon, S. (2002). Effects of a secondary task on "implicit" sequence learning: Learning or performance? Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 66, 99-109. doi:10.1007/ s00426-001-0081-82
41. Stadler, M. A. (1989). On learning complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 1061-1069. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.6.1061
42. Stadler, M. A. (1995). Role of attention in implicit learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 674-685. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.674
43. Verwey, V. B., & Clegg, B. A. (2005). Effector dependent sequence learning in the serial RT task. Psychological Research, 69, 242-251. doi:10.1007/s00426-004-0181-x (Pubitemid 40405518)
44. Willingham, D. B. (1999). Implicit motor sequence learning is not purely perceptual. Memory & Cognition, 27, 561-572.
45. Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 1047-1060. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.15.6. 1047
46. Willingham, D. B., Wells, L. A., Farrell, J. M., & Stemwedel, M. E. (2000). Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations. Memory & Cognition, 28, 366-375.
47. Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 962-978. doi:10.1037/0278 -7393.24.4.962
48. Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2001). Learning of event sequences is based on response-effect learning: Further evidence from a serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 595-613. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.3.595