ArticleMemory & cognition2018
One-back reinforcement dissociates implicit-procedural and explicit-declarative category learning.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A State-Transition-Free Delayed-Feedback Task Elicits Heterogeneous Human Responses.Journal of cognition · 2025Article
- Asking the right questions: interrogating the logic and assumptions of paradigms used to investigate interactions between procedural and declarative memory in category learning.Frontiers in cognition · 2024Review
- 1-Back reinforcement symbolic-matching by humans: How do they learn it?Learning & behavior · 2023Article
- Conceptual anchoring dissociates implicit and explicit category learning.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition · 2022Article
- Pigeons acquire the 1-back task: Implications for implicit versus explicit learning?Learning & behavior · 2021Article
- A Dissociative Framework for Understanding Same-Different Conceptualization.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2021Article
- Exploring Explicit Learning Strategies: A Dissociative Framework for Research.New ideas in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The debate over unitary/multiple category-learning utilities is reminiscent of debates about multiple memory systems and unitary/dual codes in knowledge representation. In categorization, researchers continue to seek paradigms to dissociate explicit learning processes (yielding verbalizable rules) from implicit learning processes (yielding stimulus-response associations that remain outside awareness). We introduce a new dissociation here. Participants learned matched category tasks with a multidimensional, information-integration solution or a one-dimensional, rule-based solution. They received reinforcement immediately (0-Back reinforcement) or after one intervening trial (1-Back reinforcement). Lagged reinforcement eliminated implicit, information-integration category learning but preserved explicit, rule-based learning. Moreover, information-integration learners facing lagged reinforcement spontaneously adopted explicit rule strategies that poorly suited their task. The results represent a strong process dissociation in categorization, broadening the range of empirical techniques for testing the multiple-process theoretical perspective. This and related methods that disable associative learning-fostering a transition to explicit-declarative cognition-could have broad utility in comparative, cognitive, and developmental science.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.