Psychological Research

, Volume 69, Issue 1–2, pp 124–137 | Cite as

Sequence learning and sequential effects

Original Article

Abstract

In a serial reaction time (RT) task with a probabilistic stimulus sequence, the length of the response-to-stimulus interval (RSI) and the sequence complexity was manipulated to investigate the relationship between sequence learning and sequential effects in serial RT tasks. Sequential effects refer to the influence of previous stimulus presentations on the RT to the current stimulus. Sequence learning is stimulus-transition specific and is demonstrated as the difference between practiced and unpracticed sequences within an interpolated random block of trials. There is a clear parallel between sequence learning and specific changes in sequential effect in the short RSI conditions, suggesting that a common mechanism may lie at the basis of sequence learning and automatic facilitation, which is responsible for sequential effects at short RSI. Importantly, the changes in sequential effects accompanying sequence learning are the same as those observed with practice in random serial RT tasks, indicating that the learning process underlying sequence learning is the same as in random tasks.

References

  1. Audley, R.J. (1973). Some observations on theories of choice reaction time: Tutorial review. In S. Kornblum (Ed.), Attention and Performance IV (pp. 509–545). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bertelson, P. (1961). Sequential redundancy and speed in a serial two-choice responding task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13, 90–102.Google Scholar
  3. Bertelson, P. (1963). S-R relationships and reaction times to new versus repeated signals in a serial task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 478–484.Google Scholar
  4. Bertelson, P. (1965). Serial choice reaction-time as a function of response versus signal-and-response repetition. Nature, 206, 217–218.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, K. C., & Proctor, R. W. (1993). Repetition effects with categorizable stimulus and response sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1345–1362.Google Scholar
  6. Cleeremans, A. (1993). Mechanisms of implicit learning: Connectionist models of sequence processing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cleeremans, A., & Jiménez, L. (1998). Implicit sequence learning. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 323–364). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Cleeremans, A., & McClelland, J. L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, A., Ivry, R. I., & Keele, S. W. (1990). Attention and structure in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 17–30.Google Scholar
  10. Curran, T., & Keele, S. W. (1993). Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 189–202.Google Scholar
  11. Dominey, P. F. (1998). Influences of temporal organization on sequence learning and transfer: Comments on Stadler (1995) and Curran and Keele (1993). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 234–248.Google Scholar
  12. Frensch, P. A., & Miner, C. S. (1994). Effects of presentation rate and individual differences in short-term memory capacity on an indirect measure of serial learning. Memory & Cognition, 22, 95–110.Google Scholar
  13. Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 188–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kirby, N. H. (1976). Sequential effects in two-choice reaction time: Automatic facilitation or subjective expectancy? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 567–577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kirby, N. H. (1980). Sequential effects in choice reaction time. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction times (pp. 129–172). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kornblum, S. (1973). Sequential effects in choice reaction time: A tutorial review. In S. Kornblum (Ed.), Attention and performance IV (pp. 259–288). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Laming, D. R. J. (1968). Information theory and choice-reaction times. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lewicki, P., Hill, T., & Bizot, E. (1988). Acquisition of procedural knowledge about a pattern of stimuli that cannot be articulated. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 24–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.Google Scholar
  20. Pashler, H., Baylis, G. (1991a). Procedural learning. I. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 20–32.Google Scholar
  21. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. (1991b). Procedural learning. II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1968). Repetition effects and signal classification strategies in serial choice-response tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 232–239.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Rapoport, A., & Budescu, D. V. (1997). Randomization in individual choice behavior. Psychological Review, 104, 603–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sanders, A. F. (1998). Elements of human performance: Reaction processes and attention in human skill. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Schneider, W. (1996). MEL professional. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
  26. Soetens, E. (1998). Localizing sequential effects in serial choice reaction time with the information reduction procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 547–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Soetens, E., Deboeck, M., & Hueting, J. (1984). Automatic aftereffects in two-choice reaction time: A mathematical representation of some concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 581–598.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Soetens, E., Boer, L. C., & Hueting, J. E. (1985). Expectancy or automatic facilitation? Separating sequential effects in two-choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 598–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stadler, M. A. (1992). Statistical structure and implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 318–327.Google Scholar
  30. Stadler, M. A. (1995). Role of attention in implicit learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 674–685.Google Scholar
  31. Stadler, M. A., & Neely, C. B. (1997). Effects of sequence length and structure on implicit serial learning. Psychological Research, 60, 14–23.Google Scholar
  32. Vervaeck, K. R., & Boer, L. C. (1980). Sequential effects in two-choice reaction time: subjective expectancy and automatic aftereffect at short response-stimulus intervals. Acta Psychologica, 44, 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wagenaar, W. A. (1972). Generation of random sequences by human subjects: A critical survey of literature. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 65–72.Google Scholar
  34. Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Wright, R. (1997). Implicit (and explicit) learning: Acting adaptively without knowing the consequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 181–200.Google Scholar
  35. Willingham, D. B., Greenberg, A. R., & Thomas, R. C. (1997). Response-to-stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning. Memory & Cognition, 25, 534–542.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cognitive and Physiological PsychologyUniversity of Brussels (VUB)BrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations