Abstract
Abstract. Previous research has shown that explicit and implicit knowledge of artificial grammars may decay at different rates (e.g., Tamayo & Frensch, 2007; Tunney, 2003). We extend these findings to sequential regularities embedded in serial reaction time (SRT) tasks. We compared the forgetting patterns of implicit and explicit knowledge after a retention interval of 7 days without rehearsal. Explicit knowledge decayed after 7 days, whereas implicit knowledge was retained. These data were modeled according to the assumptions involved in the single-system model suggested by Shanks, Wilkinson, and Channon (2003). The best fit for the model was obtained by modifying the parameters related to (a) the common knowledge-strength variable for implicit and explicit knowledge, and (b) reliability of the explicit test. We interpret these dissociations as a boundary condition for single-system models that assume constant random noise to explain dissociations in the forgetting patterns of implicit and explicit sequential knowledge.
References
(2002).
Single versus multiple systems of learning and memory . In J. WixtedH. PashlerEds., Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology: vol. 4 Methodology in experimental psychology (pp. 655–691). New York, NY: Wiley.(2006). On the relationship between repetition priming and recognition memory: Insights from a computational model. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 515–533. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.008
(2008a). A single-system account of the relationship between priming, recognition, and fluency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 97–111. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.97
(2008b). A unitary signal-detection model of implicit and explicit memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 367–373. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.06.005
(2012). Models of recognition, repetition priming, and fluency: Exploring a new framework. Psychological Review, 119, 40. doi: 10.1037/a0025464
(2000). On the reliability of implicit and explicit memory measures. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 227–259.
(1958). Systematic error on the part of human links in communication systems. Information and Control, 1, 334–369.
(2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418. doi: 10.1177/0013164404266386
(2001). Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 343. doi: 10.1234/12345678
(1998). Using Excel to estimate parameters from observed data: An example from source memory data. Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers, 30, 517–526. doi: 10.3758/BF03200685
(1998). Cognitive neuroscience of human memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 87–115. doi: 10.1146/annurev-.psych.49.1.87
(1989). Different ways to cue a coherent memory system: A theory for episodic, semantic, and procedural tasks. Psychological Review, 96, 208–233. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.2.208
(2007). A weighted total least-squares algorithm for fitting a straight line. Measurement Science and Technology, 18, 3438–3442. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/18/11/025
(2001). A comparison of forgetting for conscious and automatic memory processes in word fragment completion tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 45(4), 585–615. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2001.2792
(1997). The emergence of explicit knowledge during the early phase of learning in sequential reaction time tasks. Psychological Research, 60, 4–13. doi: 10.1007/BF00419676
(1997). Fluency and response speed in recognition judgments. Memory and Cognition, 25, 1–10. doi: 10.3758/BF03197280
(2009). Memory systems do not divide on consciousness: Reinterpreting memory in terms of activation and binding. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 23–49. doi: 10.1037/a0013974
(2009). Do recognition and priming index a unitary knowledge base? Comment on Shanks et al. (2003). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 572–585. doi: 10.1037/a0014543
(1994).
What are the memory systems of 1994? In D. L. SchacterE. TulvingEds., Memory systems 1994 (pp. 1–38). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(2003). Relationship between priming and recognition in deterministic and probabilistic sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 248–261. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.2.248
(1970). Forgetting: Trace erosion or retrieval failure? Science, 168, 1601. doi: 10.1126/science.168.3939.1601
(2009). Memory and brain systems: 1969–2009. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 12711–12716. doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.3575-09.2009
(2012). Modeling single versus multiple systems in implicit and explicit memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 195–196. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.02.005
(2007). Interference produces different forgetting rates for implicit and explicit knowledge. Experimental Psychology, 54, 304–310. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.54.4.304
(1982). An introduction to error analysis, Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books.
(2003). Implicit and explicit knowledge decay at different rates: A dissociation between priming and recognition in artificial grammar learning. Experimental Psychology, 50, 124–130. doi: 10.1026//1618-3169.50.2.124
(2007). Effects of retention intervals on receiver operating characteristics in artificial grammar learning. Acta Psychologica, 125, 37–50. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.002
(2003). Self-organization of cognitive performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 331. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.132.3.331
(2005). A theory about why we forget what we once knew. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 6–9. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00324.x
(1991). On the form of forgetting. Psychological science, 2(6), 409–415. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00175.x
(2003). Categorization and recognition performance of a memory-impaired group: Evidence for single-system models. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 394–406. doi: 10.1017/S1355617703930050
