title: Information theory and artificial grammar learning: inferring grammaticality from redundancy.
abstract: In artificial grammar learning experiments, participants study strings of letters constructed using a grammar and then sort novel grammatical test exemplars from novel ungrammatical ones. The ability to distinguish grammatical from ungrammatical strings is often taken as evidence that the participants have induced the rules of the grammar. We show that judgements of grammaticality are predicted by the local redundancy of the test strings, not by grammaticality itself. The prediction holds in a transfer test in which test strings involve different letters than the training strings. Local redundancy is usually confounded with grammaticality in stimuli widely used in the literature. The confounding explains why the ability to distinguish grammatical from ungrammatical strings has popularized the idea that participants have induced the rules of the grammar, when they have not. We discuss the judgement of grammaticality task in terms of attribute substitution and pattern goodness. When asked to judge grammaticality (an inaccessible attribute), participants answer an easier question about pattern goodness (an accessible attribute).
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada. randy.jamieson@umanitoba.ca.
authors.forename: Randall K
authors.initials: RK
authors.lastname: Jamieson
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
authors.forename: Uliana
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Nevzorova
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Queen's University at Kingston, Kingston, Canada.
authors.forename: Graham
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Queen's University at Kingston, Kingston, Canada.
authors.forename: D J K
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Mewhort
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D007257:Information Theory; D007600:Judgment / Q000502:physiology; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D008037:Linguistics; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D014163:Transfer, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2009 Sep;73(5):659-73
references.pmid: 18998163
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2003 Oct;31(7):1060-71
references.pmid: 14704021
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 Jul;26(4):847-62
references.pmid: 10946367
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2007 Jan;114(1):1-37
references.pmid: 17227180
references.citation: Am Sci. 1970 Jan-Feb;58(1):34-42
references.pmid: 5522663
references.citation: Front Psychol. 2010 Jun 17;1:16
references.pmid: 21607072
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1994 Apr;101(2):343-52
references.pmid: 8022966
references.citation: Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011 May;6(3):299-312
references.pmid: 26168520
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2011 Feb;64(2):209-16
references.pmid: 21279868
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1953 Mar;45(3):188-96
references.pmid: 13052851
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Dec;16(6):1058-64
references.pmid: 19966255
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1958 Dec;56(6):485-91
references.pmid: 13611173
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Mar;62(3):550-75
references.pmid: 18609412
references.citation: Cognition. 2000 Jun 15;75(3):B65-78
references.pmid: 10802046
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Sep;62(9):1757-83
references.pmid: 19219752
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2010 May;63(5):1014-39
references.pmid: 19851941
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2000 Dec;28(8):1321-32
references.pmid: 11219960
references.citation: Front Psychol. 2014 Jul 29;5:781
references.pmid: 25120503
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1998 Mar;26(2):402-20
references.pmid: 9584445
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 May;62(5):868-76
references.pmid: 19065286
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1991 Sep;17(5):875-87
references.pmid: 1834769
references.citation: Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31
references.pmid: 17835457
references.citation: Can J Exp Psychol. 2005 Mar;59(1):54-61
references.pmid: 15832634
references.citation: Behav Res Methods. 2013 Jun;45(2):470-9
references.pmid: 23055160
references.citation: Can J Exp Psychol. 2012 Jun;66(2):98-105
references.pmid: 22686158
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990 Jan;16(1):149-57
references.pmid: 2136750
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1996 Jul;103(3):429-56
references.pmid: 8759043
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Jul 19;367(1598):2046-54
references.pmid: 22688639
references.citation: Cognition. 2011 Feb;118(2):265-73
references.pmid: 21145537
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1972 Apr;93(1):69-71
references.pmid: 5013341
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Jul;32(4):707-15
references.pmid: 16822142
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2000;63(2):95-105
references.pmid: 10946584
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Jan;22(1):169-81
references.pmid: 8648284
references.citation: Top Cogn Sci. 2009 Jan;1(1):107-43
references.pmid: 25164802
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005 Jan;31(1):9-23
references.pmid: 15641901
references.citation: Science. 1996 Dec 13;274(5294):1926-8
references.pmid: 8943209
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1996 Jul;103(3):566-81
references.pmid: 8759047
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1994 Jan;20(1):79-91
references.pmid: 8138790