Search

The past 15-20 years have witnessed a particularly stronginterest in our ability to rapidly extract structuredinformation from the environment. This fundamentalprocess of human cognition is widely believed to underpinmany complex behaviors – from language development andsocial interaction to intuitive decision making and musiccognition – so this interest spans practically all branches ofcognitive science. Research on this topic can be found intwo related, yet traditionally distinct research strands,namely "implicit learning" (Reber, 1967) and "statisticallearning" (Saffran, Aslin, & Newport, 1996).Both lines of research focus on how we acquireinformation from complex stimulus domains and both relyheavily on the use of artificial systems (e.g., finite-stategrammars, pseudoword lexicons). In typical experiments,participants are initially exposed to stimuli generated by anartificial system and then tested to determine what they havelearned. Given these and other significant similarities,Perruchet and Pacton (2006) argue that these distinct linesof research actually represent two approaches to a singlephenomenon, and Conway and Christiansen (2006) proposecombining the two in name: "implicit-statistical learning".Yet, despite frequent acknowledgements that researchers inimplicit learning and statistical learning might essentially belooking at the same phenomenon, there is surprisingly littlealignment between the two strands.This symposium seeks to remedy this situation bybringing together leading researchers from both areas inorder to promote a shared understanding of researchquestions and methodologies, to discuss similarities anddifferences between the two approaches, and to worktowards a joint research agenda. The symposium comprisesfour presentations, followed by a thematic discussion, whichprovide coverage of these phenomena in terms ofdevelopment (children and adults), different languagelearning tasks (sublexical phonotactics, word acquisition,grammar learning), and their role in both production andcomprehension, each integrating multidisciplinaryperspectives. Gomez focuses on implicit-statistical learningin early development, identifying words and grammaticalsequences and the memory systems that underlie thislearning. Monaghan and Rebuschat measure word learningand grammar learning in adults, while varying theknowledge that participants have of the structure they areacquiring. Dell and Anderson demonstrate how their workon acquisition of phonotactic constraints is exhibited inspeakers’ productions, and discuss the inter-relation inspeech between implicit and statistical learning. Finally,Conway provides an overview of the two fields, andproposes a novel framework that unifies implicit learningand statistical learning.

First language acquisition is implicit, in that explicit information about the language structure to be learned is not provided to children. Instead, they must acquire both vocabulary and grammar incrementally, by generalizing across multiple situations that eventually enable links between words in utterances and referents in the environment to be established. However, this raises a problem of how vocabulary can be acquired without first knowing the role of the word within the syntax of a sentence. It also raises practical issues about the extent to which different instructional conditions – about grammar in advance of learning or feedback about correct decisions during learning – might influence second language acquisition of implicitly experienced information about the language. In an artificial language learning study, we studied participants learning language from inductive exposure, but under different instructional conditions. Language learners were exposed to complex utterances and complex scenes and had to determine the meaning and the grammar of the language from these co-occurrences with environmental scenes. We found that learning was boosted by explicit feedback, but not by explicit instruction about the grammar of the language, compared to an implicit learning condition. However, the effect of feedback was not general across all aspects of the language. Feedback improved vocabulary, but did not affect syntax learning. We further investigated the local, contextual effects on learning, and found that previous knowledge of vocabulary within an utterance improved learning but that this was driven only by certain grammatical categories in the language. The results have implications for theories of second language learning informed by our understanding of first language acquisition as well as practical implications for learning instruction and optimal, contingent adjustment of learners' environment during their learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editors' introduction provides the background to the special issue. We first outline the rationale for bringing together, in a single volume, leading researchers from two distinct, yet related research strands, implicit learning and statistical learning. The aim of the special issue is to facilitate the development of a shared understanding of research questions and methodologies, to provide a platform for discussing similarities and differences between the two strands, and to encourage the formulation of joint research agendas. We then introduce the new contributions solicited for this special issue and provide our perspective on the agenda setting that results from combining these two approaches. In their editors' introduction, Rebuschat and Monaghan provide the background to the special issue. They outline the rationale for bringing together, in a single volume, leading researchers from two distinct, yet related research strands, implicit learning and statistical learning. The editors then introduce the new contributions solicited for this special issue and provide their perspective on the agenda setting that results from combining these two approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implicit learning generally refers to the acquisition of structures that, like knowledge of natural language grammar, are not available to awareness. In contrast, statistical learning has frequently been related to learning language structures that are explicitly available, such as vocabulary. In this paper, we report an experimental paradigm that enables testing of both classic implicit and statistical learning in language. The paradigm employs an artificial language comprising sentences that accompany visual scenes that they represent, thus combining artificial grammar learning with cross‐situational statistical learning of vocabulary. We show that this methodology enables a comparison between acquisition of grammar and vocabulary, and the influences on their learning. We show that both grammar and vocabulary are promoted by explicit information about the language structure, that awareness of structure affects acquisition during learning, and awareness precedes learning, but is not distinctive at the endpoint of learning. The two traditions of learning—implicit and statistical—can be conjoined in a single paradigm to explore both the phenomenological and learning consequences of statistical structural knowledge. This article focuses on the implicit statistical learning of words and syntax. Monaghan, Schoetensack and Rebuschat introduce a novel paradigm that combines theoretical and methodological insights from the two research traditions, implicit learning and statistical learning. Their cross‐situational learning paradigm has been used in the statistical learning literature, while their measures of awareness have widely been used in implicit learning research. They illustrate how the two literatures can be conjoined in a single paradigm to explore implicit statistical learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Williams’s (2005) study on “learning without awareness” and three subsequent extensions (Faretta-Stutenberg & Morgan-Short, 2011; Hama & Leow, 2010; Rebuschat, Hamrick, Sachs, Riestenberg, & Ziegler, 2013) have reported conflicting results, perhaps in part due to differences in how awareness has been measured. The present extension of Williams (2005) addresses this possibility directly by triangulating data from three awareness measures: concurrent verbal reports (think-aloud protocols), retrospective verbal reports (postexposure interviews), and subjective measures (confidence ratings and source attributions). Participants were exposed to an artificial determiner system under incidental learning conditions. One experimental group thought aloud during training, another thought aloud during training and testing, and a third remained silent, as did a trained control group. All participants were then tested by means of a forced-choice task to establish whether learning took place. In addition, all participants provided confidence ratings and source attributions on test items and were interviewed following the test. Our results indicate that, although all experimental groups displayed learning effects, only the silent group was able to generalize the acquired knowledge to novel instances. Comparisons of concurrent and retrospective verbal report data shed light on the conflicting findings previously reported in the literature and highlight important methodological issues in implicit and explicit learning research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies of semantic implicit learning in language have only examined learning grammatical form-meaning connections in which learning could have been supported by prior linguistic knowledge. In this study we target the domain of verb meaning, specifically semantic preferences regarding novel verbs (e.g., the preference for a novel verb to take abstract objects). Using a reaction time methodology we show that, after exposure to correct verb-noun combinations, reaction times to incorrect combinations are slowed down even for participants who are unaware of the semantic regularity. This effect was obtained on a decision that was irrelevant to the actual underlying regularity, suggesting that the knowledge that has been acquired exerts its influence automatically, hence satisfying one criterion for implicitness. Combined with a lack of verbalizable knowledge, these experiments provide strong evidence for semantic implicit learning in language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the authors discussed various reports within the issue on topics including explicit and implicit language learning, syntactic processing following implicit instruction, and language tone.

The current study aims to make an initial neuroimaging contribution to central implicit-explicit issues in second language (L2) acquisition by considering how implicit and explicit contexts mediate the neural representation of L2. Focusing on implicit contexts, the study employs a longitudinal design to examine the neural representation of L2 syntax and also considers how the neural circuits underlying L2 syntax vary among learners who exhibit different levels of performance on linguistic and cognitive tasks. Results suggest that when exposed to a L2 under an implicit context, some learners are able to quickly rely on neural circuits associated with first language grammar and procedural memory, whereas other learners increasingly use extralinguistic neural circuits related to control mechanisms to process syntax. Thus, there may be multiple ways in which L2 is represented neurally, at least when learned under implicit contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Form-focused instruction studies generally report larger gains for explicit types of instruction over implicit types on measures of controlled production. Studies that used online processing measures—which do not readily allow for the application of explicit knowledge—however, suggest that this advantage occurs primarily when the target structure is similar in the first language (L1) and the second language (L2). This study investigated how explicit knowledge of a structure that does not exist in the L1 affects the initial stage of adult L2 acquisition. Fifty-one Dutch L1 speakers received a short auditory exposure (instruction) to a new language that included differential object marking (DOM), in which animate but not inanimate direct objects are preceded by a preposition. For 26 learners, the instruction was complemented by a brief rule explanation. Afterward, learners’ online processing and explicit knowledge of DOM were measured by means of eye-tracking (visual world paradigm) and oral grammaticality judgments. Results show that metalinguistic information promoted learners’ performance on the grammaticality judgment task. Although differences between the groups were also found on the eye-tracking measure, learners were not able to use DOM to predict the following object. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grammaticality judgment tests (GJTs) have been used to elicit data reflecting second language (L2) speakers’ knowledge of L2 grammar. However, the exact constructs measured by GJTs, whether primarily implicit or explicit knowledge, are disputed and have been argued to differ depending on test-related variables (i.e., time pressure and item grammaticality).Using eye-tracking, this study replicates the GJT results in R. Ellis (2005). Twenty native and 40 nonnative English speakers judged sentences with and without time pressure. Analyses revealed that time pressure suppressed regressions (right-to-left eye movements) in nonnative speakers only. Conversely, both groups regressed more on untimed, grammatical items. These findings suggest that timed and untimed GJTs measure different constructs, which could correspond to implicit and explicit knowledge, respectively. In particular, they point to a difference in the levels of automatic and controlled processing involved in responding to the timed and untimed tests. Furthermore, untimed grammatical items may induce GJT-specific task effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews three types of measures which have been widely used in psychological research to assess the conscious or unconscious status of knowledge: retrospective verbal reports, direct and indirect tests, and subjective measures. The goal is to make these techniques available to a wide audience of second language (L2) researchers and to offer suggestions for their sound use in order to promote the study of implicit L2 learning. Each section begins with a brief definition of what it means to have acquired unconscious (implicit) knowledge according to the measure in question. This is followed by a description of representative studies that illustrate how the technique has been used and by a discussion of its limitations. Each section concludes with specific guidelines on how to apply the respective measure to the investigation of implicit and explicit L2 learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The cognition of music, like that of language, is partly rooted in enculturative processes of implicit and incidental learning. Musicians and nonmusicians alike are commonly found to possess detailed implicit knowledge of musical structure which is acquired incidentally through interaction with large samples of music. This paper reports an experiment combining the methodology of artificial grammar learning with musical acquisition of melodic structure. Participants acquired knowledge of grammatical melodic structures under incidental learning conditions in both experimental and untrained control conditions. Subsequent analysis indicates a large effect of unsupervised online learning in the experimental and control group throughout the course of the testing phase suggesting an effective ongoing learning process. Musicians did not outperform nonmusicians, indicating that musical expertise is not advantageous for the learning of a new, unfamiliar melodic system. Confidence ratings suggest that participants became aware of the knowledge guiding their classification performance despite the incidental learning conditions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Across multiple situations, child and adult learners are sensitive to co-occurrences between individual words and their referents in the environment, which provide a means by which the ambiguity of word-world mappings may be resolved (Monaghan & Mattock, 2012; Scott & Fisher, 2012; Smith & Yu, 2008; Yu & Smith, 2007). In three studies, we tested whether cross-situational learning is sufficiently powerful to support simultaneous learning the referents for words from multiple grammatical categories, a more realistic reflection of more complex natural language learning situations. In Experiment 1, adult learners heard sentences comprising nouns, verbs, adjectives, and grammatical markers indicating subject and object roles, and viewed a dynamic scene to which the sentence referred. In Experiments 2 and 3, we further increased the uncertainty of the referents by presenting two scenes alongside each sentence. In all studies, we found that cross-situational statistical learning was sufficiently powerful to facilitate acquisition of both vocabulary and grammar from complex sentence-to-scene correspondences, simulating the situations that more closely resemble the challenge facing the language learner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implicit learning is a core process for the acquisition of a complex, rule-based environment from mere interaction, such as motor action, skill acquisition, or language. A body of evidence suggests that implicit knowledge governs music acquisition and perception in nonmusicians and musicians, and that both expert and nonexpert participants acquire complex melodic, harmonic, and other features from mere exposure. While current findings and computational modeling largely support the learning of chunks, some results indicate learning of more complex structures. Despite the body of evidence, more research is required to support the cross-cultural validity of implicit learning and to show that core and more complex music theoretical features are acquired implicitly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]