ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Assessing serial recall as a measure of artificial grammar learning.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Implicit statistical learning is, by definition, learning that occurs without conscious awareness. However, measures that putatively assess implicit statistical learning often require explicit reflection, for example, deciding if a sequence is 'grammatical' or 'ungrammatical'. By contrast, 'processing-based' tasks can measure learning without requiring conscious reflection, by measuring processes that are facilitated by implicit statistical learning. For example, when multiple stimuli consistently co-occur, it is efficient to 'chunk' them into a single cognitive unit, thus reducing working memory demands. Previous research has shown that when sequences of phonemes can be chunked into 'words', participants are better able to recall these sequences than random ones. Here, in two experiments, we investigated whether serial visual recall could be used to effectively measure the learning of a more complex artificial grammar that is designed to emulate the between-word relationships found in language. Methods: We adapted the design of a previous Artificial Grammar Learning (AGL) study to use a visual serial recall task, as well as more traditional reflection-based grammaticality judgement and sequence completion tasks. After exposure to "grammatical" sequences of visual symbols generated by the artificial grammar, the participants were presented with novel testing sequences. After a brief pause, participants were asked to recall the sequence by clicking on the visual symbols on the screen in order. Results: In both experiments, we found no evidence of artificial grammar learning in the Visual Serial Recall task. However, we did replicate previously reported learning effects in the reflection-based measures. Discussion: In light of the success of serial recall tasks in previous experiments, we discuss several methodological factors that influence the extent to which implicit statistical learning can be measured using these tasks.
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.