Literature DB >> 27220995

Contextual cuing as a form of nonconscious learning: Theoretical and empirical analysis in large and very large samples.

Ben Colagiuri1,2, E J Livesey3.   

Abstract

Numerous studies have demonstrated that associative learning can affect visual cognition. In one such effect, search times for a target hidden among similar distractors are faster for repeated search configurations compared with novel configurations. This contextual cuing effect is particularly interesting, because researchers routinely have failed to find evidence of recognition of the repeated configurations, concluding that the effect is a form of nonconscious learning. Vadillo, Konstantinidis, and Shanks (2016) recently criticized this conclusion on a number of methodological and conceptual grounds that suggest the area suffers from a high probability of false-negative results on awareness tests and misinterpretation of weak or absent relationships between cuing and awareness measures. We developed further predictions from theoretical models assuming that single or independent memory sources drive learning and awareness and discuss how these predictions fare in three new contextual cuing experiments involving large (n > 60) and very large samples (n > 600). The data support the absence of a positive relationship between recognition and the cuing effect both at the participant and configuration level, the probability of which being a false negative is very low in a model assuming a single memory source drives learning and awareness. This was the case using both conventional and Bayesian analyses. The combination of this theoretical and empirical analysis suggests that contextual cuing is not dependent on cue recognition and provides evidence that it reflects a genuine form of nonconscious learning.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Associative learning; Awareness; Implicit learning; Implicit memory

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27220995     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-016-1063-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  23 in total

1.  Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy.

Authors:  R S Nickerson
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2000-06

2.  Perceptual learning, awareness, and the hippocampus.

Authors:  J R Manns; L R Squire
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.899

3.  The role of awareness in Pavlovian conditioning: empirical evidence and theoretical implications.

Authors:  Peter F Lovibond; David R Shanks
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2002-01

4.  Implicit, long-term spatial contextual memory.

Authors:  Marvin M Chun; Yuhong Jiang
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Implicit sequence learning and contextual cueing do not compete for central cognitive resources.

Authors:  Luis Jiménez; Gustavo A Vázquez
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Developmental differences in implicit learning of spatial context.

Authors:  Chandan J Vaidya; Marianne Huger; Darlene V Howard; James H Howard
Journal:  Neuropsychology       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Rouder; Paul L Speckman; Dongchu Sun; Richard D Morey; Geoffrey Iverson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

8.  A unitary signal-detection model of implicit and explicit memory.

Authors:  Christopher J Berry; David R Shanks; Richard N A Henson
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Can expectancies produce placebo effects for implicit learning?

Authors:  Ben Colagiuri; Evan J Livesey; Justin A Harris
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-04

Review 10.  Underpowered samples, false negatives, and unconscious learning.

Authors:  Miguel A Vadillo; Emmanouil Konstantinidis; David R Shanks
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-02
View more
  14 in total

1.  Meaning in learning: Contextual cueing relies on objects' visual features and not on objects' meaning.

Authors:  Tal Makovski
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-01

2.  The effect of encoding conditions on learning in the prototype distortion task.

Authors:  Jessica C Lee; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Response time modeling reveals multiple contextual cuing mechanisms.

Authors:  David K Sewell; Ben Colagiuri; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-10

Review 4.  An adaptive view of attentional control.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2021-12

5.  Three Ways That Non-associative Knowledge May Affect Associative Learning Processes.

Authors:  Anna Thorwart; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-12-27

6.  Testing the controllability of contextual cuing of visual search.

Authors:  David Luque; Miguel A Vadillo; Francisco J Lopez; Rafael Alonso; David R Shanks
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Influences of luminance contrast and ambient lighting on visual context learning and retrieval.

Authors:  Xuelian Zang; Lingyun Huang; Xiuna Zhu; Hermann J Müller; Zhuanghua Shi
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Global Repetition Influences Contextual Cueing.

Authors:  Xuelian Zang; Artyom Zinchenko; Lina Jia; Leonardo Assumpção; Hong Li
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-03-27

9.  Contextual cueing of visual search is associated with greater subjective experience of the search display configuration.

Authors:  Bernhard Schlagbauer; Manuel Rausch; Michael Zehetleitner; Hermann J Müller; Thomas Geyer
Journal:  Neurosci Conscious       Date:  2018-03-02

10.  Intact Contextual Cueing for Search in Realistic Scenes with Simulated Central or Peripheral Vision Loss.

Authors:  Stefan Pollmann; Franziska Geringswald; Ping Wei; Eleonora Porracin
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.