ArticleJournal of cognition2025
How Implicit Sequence Learning and Explicit Sequence Knowledge Are Expressed in a Serial Response Time Task.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A non-verbal process dissociation procedure to disentangle explicit from implicit sequence learning.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequence learning in the serial response time task (SRTT) is one of few learning phenomena where researchers agree that such learning may proceed in the absence of awareness, while it is also possible to explicitly learn a sequence of events. In the past few decades, research into sequence learning largely focused on the type of representation that may underlie implicit sequence learning, and whether or not two independent learning systems are necessary to explain qualitative differences between implicit and explicit learning. Using the drift-diffusion model, here we take a cognitive-processes perspective on sequence learning and investigate the cognitive operations that benefit from implicit and explicit sequence learning (e.g., stimulus detection and encoding, response selection, and response execution). To separate the processes involved in expressing implicit versus explicit knowledge, we manipulated explicit sequence knowledge independently of the opportunity to express such knowledge, and analyzed the resulting performance data with a drift-diffusion model to disentangle the contributions of these sub-processes. Results revealed that implicit sequence learning does not affect stimulus processing, but benefits response selection. Moreover, beyond response selection, response execution was affected. Explicit sequence knowledge did not change this pattern if participants worked on probabilistic materials, where it is difficult to anticipate the next response. However, if materials were deterministic, explicit knowledge enabled participants to switch from stimulus-based to plan-based action control, which was reflected in ample changes in the cognitive processes involved in performing the task. First implications for theories of sequence learning, and how the diffusion model may be helpful in future research, are dicussed.
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.