Incidentally, things in general are particularly determined: An episodic-processing account of implicit learning

People can become sensitive to the rules of a grammar without awareness. A. S. Reber (1989) and others have argued that this implicit learning results from automatic abstraction of general structure. Instead, we argue that people perform only those operations required to satisfy known demands. In various tasks, Ss learned the structures of individual items, coded experiences of processing items in specific ways, or abstracted elements of the general structure: There was no evidence that Ss abstracted structure when it was not required to perform the immediate task. Each type of knowledge was acquired without awareness that the domain had a general structure, but each made Ss sensitive to certain aspects of that structure, enabling them to identify grammatical items in an unanticipated test

[1]  L. Jacoby.  Remembering the data: analyzing interactive processes in reading , 1983 .

[2]  Arthur S. Reber,et al.  Analogic and abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning: A functionalist interpretation , 1978, Cognition.

[3]  A. Reber,et al.  Implicit learning: An analysis of the form and structure of a body of tacit knowledge , 1977, Cognition.

[4]  D Broadbent,et al.  Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[5]  M Moscovitch,et al.  Rule-based and exemplar-based classification in artificial grammar learning , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[6]  Stephen K. Reed,et al.  Pattern recognition and categorization , 1972 .

[7]  Glenn Regehr,et al.  Perceptual manifestations of an analytic structure: the priority of holistic individuation. , 1993 .

[8]  Lee R. Brooks,et al.  After the learning is over: factors controlling the selective application of general and particular knowledge , 1994 .

[9]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Type I rehearsal: Maintenance and more , 1977 .

[10]  P. Lewicki.  Nonconscious biasing effects of single instances on subsequent judgments. , 1985 .

[11]  B. W. Whittlesea.  Illusions of familiarity. , 1993 .

[12]  R. Nosofsky.  Exemplar-Based Accounts of Relations Between Classification, Recognition, and Typicality , 1988 .

[13]  W. Estes.  Memory storage and retrieval processes in category learning. , 1986 .

[14]  Preservation of Specific Experiences in the Representation of General Knowledge , 1987 .

[15]  U. Neisser.  Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization , 1989 .

[16]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  Enduring influence of the purpose of experiences: Encoding-retrieval interactions in word and pseudoword perception , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[17]  D. Broadbent,et al.  On the Relationship between Task Performance and Associated Verbalizable Knowledge , 1984 .

[18]  P. A. Kolers.  Reading a Year Later. , 1976 .

[19]  Seth J. Ramus,et al.  Intact Artificial Grammar Learning in Amnesia: Dissociation of Classification Learning and Explicit Memory for Specific Instances , 1992 .

[20]  E. Rosch,et al.  Cognition and Categorization , 1980 .

[21]  R. Mathews,et al.  Role of Implicit and Explicit Processes in Learning From Examples: A Synergistic Effect , 1989 .

[22]  L. Brooks,et al.  Critical influence of particular experiences in the perception of letters, words, and phrases , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[23]  John R. Vokey,et al.  Salience of Item Knowledge in Learning Artificial Grammars , 1992 .

[24]  Dewey Rundus,et al.  Maintenance Rehearsal and Single-Level Processing. , 1977 .

[25]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Learning Artificial Grammars With Competitive Chunking , 1990 .

[26]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Measures of Memory , 1988 .

[27]  H. Roediger,et al.  Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account , 1989 .

[28]  Pierre Perruchet,et al.  Synthetic grammar learning: Implicit rule abstraction or explicit fragmentary knowledge? Journal of , 1990 .

[29]  Robert C. Mathews,et al.  Abstractness of implicit grammar knowledge: comments on Perruchet and Pacteau's analysis of synthetic grammar learning , 1990 .

[30]  Douglas L. Medin,et al.  Context theory of classification learning. , 1978 .

[31]  F. Craik,et al.  Depth of processing and the retention of words , 1975 .

[32]  Gary Cantor,et al.  On the Relationship Between Implicit and Explicit Modes in the Learning of a Complex Rule Structure , 1980 .

[33]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. , 1973 .

[34]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[35]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Processing in Human Memory , 1979 .

[36]  R. A. Carlson,et al.  A case of syntactical learning and judgment: How conscious and how abstract? , 1984 .

[37]  A. Reber.  Implicit learning and tacit knowledge , 1993 .

[38]  A. Reber.  Transfer of syntactic structure in synthetic languages. , 1969 .

[39]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing , 1977 .

[40]  L. Brooks,et al.  Nonanalytic Cognition: Memory, Perception, and Concept Learning , 1984 .

[41]  A. Reber.  Implicit learning of synthetic languages: The role of instructional set. , 1976 .

[42]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality , 1990 .