Limits...
Interacting Effects of Instructions and Presentation Rate on Visual Statistical Learning.

Bertels J, Destrebecqz A, Franco A - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: Supporting Arciuli et al.'s (2014) claim, participant performance only benefited from intentional instructions at slow presentation rates.Moreover, informing participants beforehand about the existence of statistical regularities increased their explicit knowledge of the sequences, an effect that was not modulated by presentation speed.These results support that, although visual statistical learning can take place incidentally and, to some extent, outside conscious awareness, factors such as presentation rate and prior knowledge can boost learning of these regularities, presumably by favoring the acquisition of explicit knowledge.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Research in Cognition and Neurosciences (CRCN), ULB Neuroscience Institute (UNI), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Brussels, Belgium ; Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique - FNRS Brussels, Belgium.

ABSTRACT
The statistical regularities of a sequence of visual shapes can be learned incidentally. Arciuli et al. (2014) recently argued that intentional instructions only improve learning at slow presentation rates as they favor the use of explicit strategies. The aim of the present study was (1) to test this assumption directly by investigating how instructions (incidental vs. intentional) and presentation rate (fast vs. slow) affect the acquisition of knowledge and (2) to examine how these factors influence the conscious vs. unconscious nature of the knowledge acquired. To this aim, we exposed participants to four triplets of shapes, presented sequentially in a pseudo-random order, and assessed their degree of learning in a subsequent completion task that integrated confidence judgments. Supporting Arciuli et al.'s (2014) claim, participant performance only benefited from intentional instructions at slow presentation rates. Moreover, informing participants beforehand about the existence of statistical regularities increased their explicit knowledge of the sequences, an effect that was not modulated by presentation speed. These results support that, although visual statistical learning can take place incidentally and, to some extent, outside conscious awareness, factors such as presentation rate and prior knowledge can boost learning of these regularities, presumably by favoring the acquisition of explicit knowledge.

No MeSH data available.


Average confidence for participants who performed above chance level, plotted separately for each instructions group and for correct and incorrect completion responses. Error bars represent 95% of confidence intervals around the means. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4663239&req=5

Figure 3: Average confidence for participants who performed above chance level, plotted separately for each instructions group and for correct and incorrect completion responses. Error bars represent 95% of confidence intervals around the means. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.

Mentions: A repeated measures ANOVA applied on participants’ confidence transformed by the arcsine function with Completion response accuracy (two levels: Correct, Error) as a within-subject factor and Instructions and Pace as between-subjects factors revealed a significant effect of Response accuracy, F(1,74) = 20.511, p < 0.001, = 0.217. Overall, participants were more confident in their correct than in their incorrect completion responses (53.8% vs. 37.2%, respectively), indicating overall conscious knowledge by the zero-correlation criterion. The interaction between this factor and Instructions group was significant, F(1,74) = 4.447, p = 0.038, = 0.057: the difference between participants’ confidence for correct vs. incorrect completion responses was larger in the Intentional than in the Incidental group (22.7% vs. 10.6%). Both differences significantly differed from zero, indicating conscious knowledge by the zero-correlation criterion in both groups, t(40) = 5.006, p < 0.001 and t(36) = 3.385, p = 0.002. All other effects or interactions did not reach significance. Figure 3 displays mean confidence by completion response accuracy plotted separately for each instructions group.


Interacting Effects of Instructions and Presentation Rate on Visual Statistical Learning.

Bertels J, Destrebecqz A, Franco A - Front Psychol (2015)

Average confidence for participants who performed above chance level, plotted separately for each instructions group and for correct and incorrect completion responses. Error bars represent 95% of confidence intervals around the means. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4663239&req=5

Figure 3: Average confidence for participants who performed above chance level, plotted separately for each instructions group and for correct and incorrect completion responses. Error bars represent 95% of confidence intervals around the means. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
Mentions: A repeated measures ANOVA applied on participants’ confidence transformed by the arcsine function with Completion response accuracy (two levels: Correct, Error) as a within-subject factor and Instructions and Pace as between-subjects factors revealed a significant effect of Response accuracy, F(1,74) = 20.511, p < 0.001, = 0.217. Overall, participants were more confident in their correct than in their incorrect completion responses (53.8% vs. 37.2%, respectively), indicating overall conscious knowledge by the zero-correlation criterion. The interaction between this factor and Instructions group was significant, F(1,74) = 4.447, p = 0.038, = 0.057: the difference between participants’ confidence for correct vs. incorrect completion responses was larger in the Intentional than in the Incidental group (22.7% vs. 10.6%). Both differences significantly differed from zero, indicating conscious knowledge by the zero-correlation criterion in both groups, t(40) = 5.006, p < 0.001 and t(36) = 3.385, p = 0.002. All other effects or interactions did not reach significance. Figure 3 displays mean confidence by completion response accuracy plotted separately for each instructions group.

Bottom Line: Supporting Arciuli et al.'s (2014) claim, participant performance only benefited from intentional instructions at slow presentation rates.Moreover, informing participants beforehand about the existence of statistical regularities increased their explicit knowledge of the sequences, an effect that was not modulated by presentation speed.These results support that, although visual statistical learning can take place incidentally and, to some extent, outside conscious awareness, factors such as presentation rate and prior knowledge can boost learning of these regularities, presumably by favoring the acquisition of explicit knowledge.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Research in Cognition and Neurosciences (CRCN), ULB Neuroscience Institute (UNI), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Brussels, Belgium ; Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique - FNRS Brussels, Belgium.

ABSTRACT
The statistical regularities of a sequence of visual shapes can be learned incidentally. Arciuli et al. (2014) recently argued that intentional instructions only improve learning at slow presentation rates as they favor the use of explicit strategies. The aim of the present study was (1) to test this assumption directly by investigating how instructions (incidental vs. intentional) and presentation rate (fast vs. slow) affect the acquisition of knowledge and (2) to examine how these factors influence the conscious vs. unconscious nature of the knowledge acquired. To this aim, we exposed participants to four triplets of shapes, presented sequentially in a pseudo-random order, and assessed their degree of learning in a subsequent completion task that integrated confidence judgments. Supporting Arciuli et al.'s (2014) claim, participant performance only benefited from intentional instructions at slow presentation rates. Moreover, informing participants beforehand about the existence of statistical regularities increased their explicit knowledge of the sequences, an effect that was not modulated by presentation speed. These results support that, although visual statistical learning can take place incidentally and, to some extent, outside conscious awareness, factors such as presentation rate and prior knowledge can boost learning of these regularities, presumably by favoring the acquisition of explicit knowledge.

No MeSH data available.