Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11765734

The relationship between the structural mere exposure effect and the implicit learning process.

Abstract

Three experiments are reported that investigate the relationship between the structural mere exposure effect (SMEE) and implicit learning in an artificial grammar task. Subjects were presented with stimuli generated from a finite-state grammar and were asked to memorize them. In a subsequent test phase subjects were required first to rate how much they liked novel items, and second whether or not they thought items conformed to the rules of the grammar. A small but consistent effect of grammaticality was found on subjects' liking ratings (a "structural mere exposure effect") in all three experiments, but only when encoding and testing conditions were consistent. A change in the surface representation of stimuli between encoding and test (Experiment 1), memorizing fragments of items and being tested on whole items (Experiment 2), and a mismatch of processing operations between encoding and test (Experiment 3) all removed the SMEE. In contrast, the effect of grammaticality on rule judgements remained intact in the face of all three manipulations. It is suggested that rule judgements reflect attempts to explicitly recall information about training items, whereas the SMEE can be explained in terms of an attribution of processing fluency.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B R Newell, J E Bright. 2001. The relationship between the structural mere exposure effect and the implicit learning process.. https://doi.org/10.1080/713756009

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Age-related cognitive decline in the menopause: effects of hormone replacement therapy on cognitive event-related potentials.

OBJECTIVE: Although epidemiological and clinical studies suggest that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) may protect against cognitive disorders and neurodegenerative diseases, the relation between estrogen and cognition in postmenopausal women remains controversial. METHODS: In a double-blind placebo-controlled, parallel group design study the effects of HRT with the estrogen-progestogen combination Presomen 1.25 compositum((R)) (1.25mg equine conjugated estrogens administered for 21 days plus the progestogen 5mg medrogeston given for 11 days) on event-related potentials (ERPs) in postmenopausal patients with age-related cognitive decline (DSM-IV code 780.9, ICD-10 code R 41.8) were investigated. After a pre-drug comparison with age-matched normal postmenopausal controls, 48 psychotropic drug-free patients aged 60 +/- 6 years were randomized to receive either placebo or verum for 4 months. ERPs were recorded before as well as on the 91-92 days of the study, which thus fell into the estrogen phase of the treatment during the fourth cycle. RESULTS: At baseline, patients showed a lengthening of P300 latency and an attenuation of P300 amplitudes as compared with normal controls. After HRT with Presomen, a significant shortening of P300 latency as compared with placebo was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The baseline P300 differences suggest that in the patient group the aging process was advanced, while after HRT with Presomen a significant improvement and normalization of information processing as indexed by P300 was observed.

Cognition↗

Measuring the speed of the conscious components of recognition memory: remembering is faster than knowing.

Three experiments investigated response times (RTs) for remember and know responses in recognition memory. RTs to remember responses were faster than RTs to know responses, regardless of whether the remember-know decision was preceded by an old/new decision (two-step procedure) or was made without a preceding old/new decision (one-step procedure). The finding of faster RTs for R responses was also found when remember-know decisions were made retrospectively. These findings are inconsistent with dual-process models of recognition memory, which predict that recollection is slower and more effortful than familiarity. Word frequency did not influence RTs, but remember responses were faster for words than for nonwords. We argue that the difference in RTs to remember and know responses reflects the time taken to make old/new decisions on the basis of the type of information activated at test.

Cognition↗