Performing the Unexplainable: Implicit Task Performance Reveals Individually Reliable Sequence Learning without Explicit Knowledge

By Sanchez, Daniel J.; Gobel, Eric W. et al. | Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, December 2010 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Performing the Unexplainable: Implicit Task Performance Reveals Individually Reliable Sequence Learning without Explicit Knowledge


Sanchez, Daniel J., Gobel, Eric W., Reber, Paul J., Psychonomic Bulletin & Review


Memory-impaired patients express intact implicit perceptual-motor sequence learning, but it has been difficult to obtain a similarly clear dissociation in healthy participants. When explicit memory is intact, participants acquire some explicit knowledge and performance improvements from implicit learning may be subtle. Therefore, it is difficult to determine whether performance exceeds what could be expected on the basis of the concomitant explicit knowledge. Using a challenging new sequence-learning task, robust implicit learning was found in healthy participants with virtually no associated explicit knowledge. Participants trained on a repeating sequence that was selected randomly from a set of five. On a performance test of all five sequences, performance was best on the trained sequence, and two-thirds of the participants exhibited individually reliable improvement (by chi-square analysis). Participants could not reliably indicate which sequence had been trained by either recognition or recall. Only by expressing their knowledge via performance were participants able to indicate which sequence they had learned.

Experts in skilled motor performance are acutely aware of the distinction between the ability to perform a task and the ability to describe the operations involved in its execution. This dissociation leads to such effects as verbal overshadowing (Flegal & Anderson, 2008; following Schooler & Engstler-Schooler, 1990), in which consciously reflecting on motor movements hinders performance. Knowledge supporting skilled performance may sometimes be reportable verbally, but when conscious reflection produces interference, it implies that there may be separate representations for performance and reporting that can be put into competition.

Memory systems theory has provided a sizeable volume of research on the separate brain systems supporting these different memory types. Explicit, declarative memory supports verbal description and depends on the medial-temporal lobe (MTL) memory system, whereas implicit learning is supported by nondeclarative memory systems that improve performance (Milner, Squire, & Kandel, 1998; Squire & Knowlton, 2000). The basis for this research is the observation of preserved implicit memory in amnesic patients with MTL damage. When trying to learn new facts and events, these patients are typically severely impaired. However, certain forms of skill learning remain intact-for example, mirror tracing, mirrored text reading, and perceptual-motor sequence learning (Brooks & Baddeley, 1976; Cohen & Squire, 1980; Gabrieli, Corkin, Mickel, & Growdon, 1993; Nissen & Bullemer, 1987; Reber & Squire, 1994).

Despite the abundance of neuropsychological evidence for multiple memory systems, clear dissociations between knowing "how" and reporting "what" have been difficult to observe in healthy participants. Functional neuroimaging with healthy participants has shown a dissociation between memory systems in some tasks (Reber, Gitelman, Parrish, & Mesulam, 2003) but not in others (Willingham, Salidis, & Gabrieli, 2002). Attempts to show behavioral dissociations often run into two types of problems: First, healthy participants have intact declarative memory capabilities and are able to remember events that occurred during learning, creating difficulties in separating explicit memory from knowledge of the skill being acquired (Willingham, Greeley, & Bardone, 1993). Both types of memory often develop in parallel (Willingham & Goedert-Eschmann, 1999), and the amount of explicit knowledge can range from minimal to extensive enough that participants can describe and cognitively manipulate their newly obtained memories (Smyth & Shanks, 2008; Wilkinson & Shanks, 2004).

Second, most studies of implicit skill learning find small learning effects that are reliable across groups of participants, making it difficult to be certain that individuals with poor explicit memory have significant implicit knowledge.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Performing the Unexplainable: Implicit Task Performance Reveals Individually Reliable Sequence Learning without Explicit Knowledge
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?