Closing in on the role of attention in implicit sequence learning.
Item
-
Title
-
Closing in on the role of attention in implicit sequence learning.
-
Identifier
-
AAI9807940
-
identifier
-
9807940
-
Creator
-
Hsiao, Andrew T.
-
Contributor
-
Adviser: Arthur S. Reber
-
Date
-
1997
-
Language
-
English
-
Publisher
-
City University of New York.
-
Subject
-
Psychology, Experimental | Psychology, Cognitive
-
Abstract
-
Does implicit learning require attention? This is the question the present study attempted to address. Nissen and Bullemer (1987) first raised the question by testing subjects in a serial reaction time (SRT) task performed together with a tone-counting secondary task. In one group, the SRT task followed a repeating pattern while in the other, it was random. The secondary task was introduced to engage the attentional mechanism, thus forcing the SRT task to be performed when less attention was available. As the difference in RT between the repeating-pattern group and the random group failed to reach statistical significance, they concluded that sequence learning requires attention. However, the conclusion has been challenged in subsequent studies using different approaches (Cohen, Ivry & Keele, 1990; Curran & Keele, 1993, Frensch, Buchner & Lin, 1994).;The present study showed that, in contrast to Cohen et al. (1990), even sequences made up entirely of ambiguous transitions can still be learned. However, instead of coming to a conclusion that sequence learning may be achieved without attention, further analyses indicated that things are far more complicated than researchers in the field initially realized. First, it was found that subjects who performed the secondary task relatively poorly showed much better learning than those who did well. If doing well on the secondary task implies paying more attention to it, this would suggest that sequence learning is affected by the availability of attention. The fact that giving more attention to the secondary task resulted in a compromise in sequence learning indicates that (1) the two tasks share common resources; and (2) these resources are limited in capacity. Second, it was found that when subjects were given a practice on the secondary task prior to performing the dual-task SRT task, sequence learning was reduced. It is likely that the practice emphasized the difficulty of the secondary task. This encouraged the subjects to allocate more attention to the task, thus making attention less available to sequence encoding. Third, manipulating the onset of the secondary task stimulus systematically demonstrated that learning was impaired when subjects were paying more attention to the secondary task while the two competing tasks were presented in close succession. This suggests that the two cognitive processes can share the same resources successfully unless both tasks demand attention at the same time or in a very narrow time frame. Together, these findings invite the conclusion that attention remains a critical determinant in sequence learning.
-
Type
-
dissertation
-
Source
-
PQT Legacy CUNY.xlsx
-
degree
-
Ph.D.
