Literature DB >> 12587897

The use of control groups in artificial grammar learning.

Rolf Reber1, Pierre Perruchet.   

Abstract

Experimenters assume that participants of an experimental group have learned an artificial grammar if they classify test items with significantly higher accuracy than does a control group without training. The validity of such a comparison, however, depends on an additivity assumption: Learning is superimposed on the action of non-specific variables-for example, repetitions of letters, which modulate the performance of the experimental group and the control group to the same extent. In two experiments we were able to show that this additivity assumption does not hold. Grammaticality classifications in control groups without training (Experiments 1 and 2) depended on non-specific features. There were no such biases in the experimental groups. Control groups with training on randomized strings (Experiment 2) showed fewer biases than did control groups without training. Furthermore, we reanalysed published research and demonstrated that earlier experiments using control groups without training had produced similar biases in control group performances, bolstering the finding that using control groups without training is methodologically unsound.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12587897     DOI: 10.1080/02724980244000297

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A        ISSN: 0272-4987


  13 in total

1.  Implicit learning is order dependent.

Authors:  Randall K Jamieson; John R Vokey; D J K Mewhort
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-10-20

2.  Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech.

Authors:  Ann R Bradlow; Tessa Bent
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-05-29

3.  Domain-specific learning of grammatical structure in musical and phonological sequences.

Authors:  Benjamin Martin Bly; Ricardo E Carrión; Björn Rasch
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-01

4.  Connectionist models of artificial grammar learning: what type of knowledge is acquired?

Authors:  Annette Kinder; Anja Lotz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-11-08

5.  Regularity of unit length boosts statistical learning in verbal and nonverbal artificial languages.

Authors:  L Hoch; M D Tyler; B Tillmann
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-02

6.  Syntactic transfer in artificial grammar learning.

Authors:  T Beesley; A J Wills; M E Le Pelley
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-02

7.  Cross-language differences in cue use for speech segmentation.

Authors:  Michael D Tyler; Anne Cutler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Stimulus set size and statistical coverage of the grammar in artificial grammar learning.

Authors:  Fenna H Poletiek; Tessa J P van Schijndel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-12

9.  Unconscious conditioning: Demonstration of existence and difference from conscious conditioning.

Authors:  Anthony G Greenwald; Jan De Houwer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2017-12

10.  Expectations about stimulus structure in implicit learning.

Authors:  Emmanuel M Pothos
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.