Psychological Research

, Volume 77, Issue 4, pp 449–462

Correlation and response relevance in sequence learning

Original Article
  • 166 Downloads

Abstract

We tested the effects of introducing a secondary sequence into the serial reaction time task. Specifically, we examined the role of correlated streams of information and response relevance. In the first experiment, the order of stimulus locations was correlated with the order of key press responses in the conventional way. A symbol-identity sequence, of a different length, was also present but no manual responses were made to it, and it was not correlated with any other stream of information. In the second experiment, two concurrent streams of location-based stimuli were presented. Both were sequenced but only one sequence required responses. Importantly, the sequences were either correlated with one another or not (same vs. different lengths). In the third experiment, the same design was used but with one sequence visual and the other auditory. In all three experiments, participants became sensitive to the sequence that required responses, and resultant knowledge was largely explicit. They were also sensitive to the sequence that did not require responses but only when it was correlated with the sequence that did, and here resultant knowledge was implicit. The findings suggest that the presence of a secondary sequence can affect learning, but only when stimuli in that sequence are integrated, through correlation, with responses made to the primary sequence.

References

  1. Abrahamse, E. L., Jiménez, L., Verwey, W. B., & Clegg, B. (2010). Representing serial action and perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 603–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cock, J. J., Berry, D. C., & Buchner, A. (2002). Negative priming and sequence learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2007). Incidental task sequence learning: perceptual rather than conceptual? Psychological Research, 71, 140–151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deroost, N., & Soetens, E. (2006). Spatial processing and perceptual sequence learning in SRT tasks. Experimental Psychology, 53, 16–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hoffmann, J., & Koch, I. (1998). Implicit learning of loosely defined structures. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of Implicit Learning (pp. 161–199). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Hoffmann, J., Sebald, A., & Stoecker, C. (2001). Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in serial reaction time tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 27, 470–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hsiao, A. T., & Reber, A. S. (2001). The dual-task SRT procedure: fine-tuning the timing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 336–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jiménez, L., & Mendez, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 25, 236–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2000). The role of stimulus-based and response-based spatial information in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 26, 863–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 22, 350–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Meier, B., & Cock, J. (2010). Are correlated streams of information necessary for implicit sequence learning? Acta Psychologica, 133, 17–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meier, B., & Cock, J. (2012). The role of cues and stimulus valency in implicit task sequence learning: a task sequence is not enough. In A. L. Magnusson & D. J. Lindberg (Eds.). Psychology of Performance and Defeat (pp. 155–166). Hauppauge: Nova Science Publisher.Google Scholar
  14. Nemeth, D., Hallgato, E., Janacsek, K., Sandor, T., & Londe, Z. (2009). Perceptual and motor factors of implicit skill learning. Neuro Report, 20, 1654–1658.Google Scholar
  15. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rah, S. K.-Y., Reber, A. S., & Hsiao, A. T. (2000). Anotherwrinkle on the dual-task SRT experiment: it’s probably not dual task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 309–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Riedel, B., & Burton, A. M. (2006). Auditory sequence learning: differential sensitivity to task relevant and task irrelevant sequences. Psychological Research, 70, 337–344.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Robertson, E. M., Tormos, J. M., Maeda, F., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2001). The role of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during sequence learning is specific for spatial information. Cerebral Cortex, 11, 628–635.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rowland, L. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2006). Attention modulates the learning of multiple contingencies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 643–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schmidtke, V., & Heuer, H. (1997). Task integration as a factor in secondary-task effects on sequence learning. Psychological Research, 60, 53–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwarb, H., & Schumacher, E. H. (2010). Implicit sequence learning is represented by stimulus-response rules. Memory and Cognition, 38, 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shin, J. C., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Concurrent learning of temporal and spatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 28, 445–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stoecker, C., Sebald, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2003). The influence of response-effect compatibility in a serial reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 685–703.Google Scholar
  24. Weiermann, B., Cock, J., & Meier, B. (2010). What matters in implicit task sequence learning: perceptual stimulus features, task-sets, or correlated streams of information? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 36, 1492–1509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weiermann, B., & Meier, B. (2012). Implicit task sequence learning with auditory stimuli. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 468–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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 and Cognition, 27, 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of BernBern 9Switzerland

Personalised recommendations