title: Implicit learning of stimulus regularities increases cognitive control.
abstract: In this study we aim to examine how the implicit learning of statistical regularities of successive stimuli affects the ability to exert cognitive control. In three experiments, sequences of flanker stimuli were segregated into pairs, with the second stimulus contingent on the first. Response times were reliably faster for the second stimulus if its congruence tended to match the congruence of the preceding stimulus, even though most participants were not explicitly aware of the statistical regularities (Experiment 1). In contrast, performance was not enhanced if the congruence of the second stimuli tended to mismatch the congruence of the first stimulus (Experiment 2). The lack of improvement appears to result from a failure of learning mismatch contingencies (Experiment 3). The results suggest that implicit learning of inter-stimulus relationships can facilitate cognitive control.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology and Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
authors.forename: Jiaying
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Zhao
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.
authors.forename: Devin
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Karbowicz
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Osherson
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003071:Cognition; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning; D008297:Male; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D011930:Reaction Time; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2013 Feb;39(1):271-84
references.pmid: 22428671
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2010 Mar;38(2):197-205
references.pmid: 20173192
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2006 Sep;34(6):1260-72
references.pmid: 17225507
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2004 Feb;68(1):1-17
references.pmid: 14752663
references.citation: Exp Psychol. 2012;59(4):175-82
references.pmid: 22411181
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(10):1993-2007
references.pmid: 22670796
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1992 Dec;121(4):480-506
references.pmid: 1431740
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Mar;7(3):134-140
references.pmid: 12639695
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Feb;16(1):121-6
references.pmid: 19145021
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Aug;20(4):798-805
references.pmid: 23371807
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 2010 Sep;136(5):849-74
references.pmid: 20804238
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52
references.pmid: 11488380
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2003 May;6(5):450-2
references.pmid: 12704394