内隐与外显协同学习的发展研究
|
摘要
内隐学习是一种无意识获得刺激环境中复杂知识的过程。在这一过程中个体虽然没有意识到或者无法说出控制他们行为的规则是什么,但却学会了这种规则。内隐与外显的协同学习是指内隐与外显两种学习方式结合时产生相互促进,表现出学习成绩显著高于单独的内隐或外显学习的协同效应。
内隐学习与外显学习的截然分离与现实生活中的学习不相符合。因此,将内隐学习、外显学习、内隐与外显协同学习结合起来进行思考,并通过影响因素、年龄差异及个体差异的探讨,更能客观地揭示内隐学习的特征与表征机制。同时,也能进一步明确内隐学习与学习效率的关系,深化对学习本质的研究。
本研究以小学四年级、五年级、六年级、初一和高一学生为被试。从材料难度的角度选取规则难度较大的限定状态人工语法和规则难度较低的双条件人工语法;从材料性质的角度又选取了真实材料与人工语法材料。采用强分离的研究范式,将学习方式分为匹配、编辑、匹配—编辑和交替四种,分别相当于内隐学习、外显学习,先内隐后外显和内隐外显交替的四种学习形式,考察了内隐学习及内隐与外显的协同学习的发展特点和规律。
论文共有五个实验研究组成:
实验一是探索内隐与外显协同学习的产生以及材料难度对内隐学习和协同学习的影响,进一步揭示内隐学习与外显学习的关系、内隐知识的迁移及表征机制。
实验二随机选取小学五、六年级与初一、高一四个年龄阶段的480名被试。从发展的视角考察内隐学习、内隐与外显协同学习的年级差异。
实验三是经过严格的筛选选出的120名学优生与120名学困生,从个体差异的角度进行内隐学习及内隐与外显协同学习的探索。
实验四采用整群抽样选取的小学四年级、五年级、六年级和初一各240人,主要选取了真实材料的英语词法中的双写规则,并和相同规则的人工材料字母串进行比较,探索真实材料的内隐学习、协同学习的特点及发展规律。
实验五采用指导语分离范式,对随机选取的小学四、五、六和初一年级各90名的被试进行有意义真实材料的内隐学习及协同学习的探索,进一步明确意识在内隐学习及协同学习中的作用。
结果发现:
(1)两种难度的人工语法材料学习中,均出现显著的内隐与外显协同学习,内隐外显协同学习成绩均好于单独的内隐或者外显学习,表现出协同学习的优势效应。相同字母集的协同学习成绩均显著高于不同字母集的协同学习成绩,表明内隐学习的规则的可迁移性,但迁移要受到刺激表面特征的影响。
(2)小学五年级、小学六年级、初一和高一四个年级的内隐学习成绩和外显学习成绩的差异均不显著。内隐与外显的协同学习(先内隐后外显和内隐与外显交替)的成绩在初一年级后有显著增长,高一年级的成绩显著高于其他三个年级。
(3)学优生与学困生的内隐学习成绩不存在显著差异;学优生的外显学习、内隐一外显学习和交替学习成绩显著高于学困生的成绩。就学优生而言,其外显学习、协同学习成绩显著高于内隐学习成绩;而学困生在四种学习方式上成绩差异不显著。表明学优生学习中意识成分的作用较大,学困生的学习中意识成分的作用相对较小。
(4)真实材料的协同学习成绩要显著好于单独的内隐或者外显学习。在相同的学习条件下,真实材料的学习成绩都相对好于人工语法字母串的学习成绩。
(5)真实材料学习中,内隐学习在小四、小五、小六和初一四个年级没有表现出显著的差异。协同学习的形式从低年级向高年级成绩逐渐提高。小学六年级、初一年级的成绩显著高于其他年级,表现出了发展的态势。而人工材料字母串的协同学习在初一年级以前没有表现出年龄差异。
综合以上研究结果:内隐知识的抽象性表征观能够较好地解释内隐与外显协同学习的特点与变化,内隐学习到的规则可以进行迁移但受到规则结构和刺激整体特征的双重影响。从小学高年级到高一,协同学习在人工语法材料与真实材料中存在着发展性与个体差异。真实材料学习的意识成分贡献较大。内隐学习对学习效率的影响更主要的是通过与外显结合的方式来实现的。
Implicit learning is an unconscious process that acquires the complex knowledge in stimulating environment. Although individual dose not realized or is unable to state the rules that control their behavior during the process, but actually they can learn from these rules. The synergistic learning of implicit and explicit is the pattern that the mutual promotion is generated when implicit and explicit learning are coordinated, demonstrating the synergistic effect that the performance was significantly higher than any single learning.
Any separation of implicit and explicit learning is not consistent with realistic learning. So we should consider that implicit learning, explicit learning and synergistic learning of Implicit and explicit are combined together. Through discussing about the influencing factors, age differences and individual differences, it could more objectively show the characteristics of implicit learning and representational mechanism. Meanwhile, it could further clarify the relationship between implicit learning and learning efficiency, and deepen the study of learning nature.
This study selected subjects from students of grade four, grade five, grade six of primary school, grade one in junior high school and grade one in senior high school. From the aspect of material difficulty, it selected definite-state artificial grammar in which rules were more difficult and biconditional artificial grammar as lower. From the aspect of materials nature, this study selected real materials and artificial grammar materials. Used a much stronger implicit-explicit manipulation program, researcher divided learning style into the match task, the edit task, the match/editing task and alternate task, which were equivalent of implicit learning, explicit learning, first implicit learning and then explicit learning, alternate learning to inspect the developmental characteristics and rules of implicit learning as well as the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
This paper consists of five experiments:
Experiment 1 was to explore the generation of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit, the influence from difficulty level of materials to implicit learning and synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. It further revealed the relationship between the implicit learning and explicit learning, the transfer of implicit knowledge and its representational mechanism.
Experiment 2 randomly selected 480 students including four aging groups, which are from grade five and grade six of elementary school, grade one of junior high school and grade one of senior high school, to investigate the grades difference of implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit from the developmental view.
Experiment 3 selected rigorously 120 students good at study and 120 students with learning difficulties to explore the implicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit from the perspective of individual differences.
Experiment 4 selected 240 subjects through cluster sampling from each grade, which are grade four, grade five, grade six of elementary school and grade one of junior high school, mainly chose the real material with English lexical dual writing rules, to compare with the same rules in strings generated by an artificial grammar to study implicit learning of real materials, the developmental rules and characteristics of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
Experiment 5 randomly selected 90 students from each grade of grade four, five, six of primary school and grade one of junior high school, using the paradigm of instruction separation, to explore the implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit of meaningful real materials, and further clarify the role of consciousness in the implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
The results showed as follows:
(1) In process of artificial grammar materials learning at two difficulty levels, showed a significant effect of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. The best performance occurred in the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups; demonstrating the advantages of this learning mode. The performance in same letter sets learning of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups was significantly higher than that in different letter sets, suggesting that the rules of implicit learning can be transferred, while the transfer was affected by the surface characteristics of stimulus.
(2) Difference between implicit groups and explicit groups is not significant in grade five and grade six of primary schools, grade one of junior high school and grade one of senior high school. Performance of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups (first implicit then explicit and alternation) increased significantly since grade one of junior high school. Performance of students in grade one of senior high school is robustly higher than that of the other three grades.
(3) There is no significant difference in implicit learning performance between students good at study and students with learning difficulties. Performance of students good at study in explicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit and the alternate learning was significantly better than that of students with learning difficulties. Performance of students good at study in explicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit was significantly higher than that in implicit learning. There are no significant differences between the performances of students with learning difficulties among four learning styles. These results suggested that role of consciousness in learning process is more important for students good at study than that for students with learning difficulties.
(4) Performance of real material synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups was significantly better than that of the implicit or explicit learning groups. Under the same learning conditions, real materials groups performed significantly better than artificial grammar letter strings groups.
(5) On real learning materials task, performance of the implicit learning groups in grade four, five and six of elementary school and grade one of junior high school showed no significant differences. Performance of the synergistic learning of implicit groups and explicit groups gradually improved from low-grade to high-grade. The performance of students in grade six, grade one of junior high school was significantly higher than that of students in other grades, which indicated the developmental trend. The significant difference on artificial materials task with the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit didn't appear in groups from grade one of junior high school.
Based on above results, the abstract representation view concerning implicit knowledge is suitable to account for the characteristics and changes of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. The rules resulted from implicit learning can be transferred, but dually influenced by the rule structure and the total characteristics of stimulus. From the higher elementary grades to grade one of senior high school, synergistic learning of implicit and explicit effect is developmental and different individually on artificial grammar and real materials learning task. Consciousness plays a more important role in real materials learning task. Implicit learning mainly coordinates with explicit learning to influence learning efficiency.
内隐学习与外显学习的截然分离与现实生活中的学习不相符合。因此,将内隐学习、外显学习、内隐与外显协同学习结合起来进行思考,并通过影响因素、年龄差异及个体差异的探讨,更能客观地揭示内隐学习的特征与表征机制。同时,也能进一步明确内隐学习与学习效率的关系,深化对学习本质的研究。
本研究以小学四年级、五年级、六年级、初一和高一学生为被试。从材料难度的角度选取规则难度较大的限定状态人工语法和规则难度较低的双条件人工语法;从材料性质的角度又选取了真实材料与人工语法材料。采用强分离的研究范式,将学习方式分为匹配、编辑、匹配—编辑和交替四种,分别相当于内隐学习、外显学习,先内隐后外显和内隐外显交替的四种学习形式,考察了内隐学习及内隐与外显的协同学习的发展特点和规律。
论文共有五个实验研究组成:
实验一是探索内隐与外显协同学习的产生以及材料难度对内隐学习和协同学习的影响,进一步揭示内隐学习与外显学习的关系、内隐知识的迁移及表征机制。
实验二随机选取小学五、六年级与初一、高一四个年龄阶段的480名被试。从发展的视角考察内隐学习、内隐与外显协同学习的年级差异。
实验三是经过严格的筛选选出的120名学优生与120名学困生,从个体差异的角度进行内隐学习及内隐与外显协同学习的探索。
实验四采用整群抽样选取的小学四年级、五年级、六年级和初一各240人,主要选取了真实材料的英语词法中的双写规则,并和相同规则的人工材料字母串进行比较,探索真实材料的内隐学习、协同学习的特点及发展规律。
实验五采用指导语分离范式,对随机选取的小学四、五、六和初一年级各90名的被试进行有意义真实材料的内隐学习及协同学习的探索,进一步明确意识在内隐学习及协同学习中的作用。
结果发现:
(1)两种难度的人工语法材料学习中,均出现显著的内隐与外显协同学习,内隐外显协同学习成绩均好于单独的内隐或者外显学习,表现出协同学习的优势效应。相同字母集的协同学习成绩均显著高于不同字母集的协同学习成绩,表明内隐学习的规则的可迁移性,但迁移要受到刺激表面特征的影响。
(2)小学五年级、小学六年级、初一和高一四个年级的内隐学习成绩和外显学习成绩的差异均不显著。内隐与外显的协同学习(先内隐后外显和内隐与外显交替)的成绩在初一年级后有显著增长,高一年级的成绩显著高于其他三个年级。
(3)学优生与学困生的内隐学习成绩不存在显著差异;学优生的外显学习、内隐一外显学习和交替学习成绩显著高于学困生的成绩。就学优生而言,其外显学习、协同学习成绩显著高于内隐学习成绩;而学困生在四种学习方式上成绩差异不显著。表明学优生学习中意识成分的作用较大,学困生的学习中意识成分的作用相对较小。
(4)真实材料的协同学习成绩要显著好于单独的内隐或者外显学习。在相同的学习条件下,真实材料的学习成绩都相对好于人工语法字母串的学习成绩。
(5)真实材料学习中,内隐学习在小四、小五、小六和初一四个年级没有表现出显著的差异。协同学习的形式从低年级向高年级成绩逐渐提高。小学六年级、初一年级的成绩显著高于其他年级,表现出了发展的态势。而人工材料字母串的协同学习在初一年级以前没有表现出年龄差异。
综合以上研究结果:内隐知识的抽象性表征观能够较好地解释内隐与外显协同学习的特点与变化,内隐学习到的规则可以进行迁移但受到规则结构和刺激整体特征的双重影响。从小学高年级到高一,协同学习在人工语法材料与真实材料中存在着发展性与个体差异。真实材料学习的意识成分贡献较大。内隐学习对学习效率的影响更主要的是通过与外显结合的方式来实现的。
Implicit learning is an unconscious process that acquires the complex knowledge in stimulating environment. Although individual dose not realized or is unable to state the rules that control their behavior during the process, but actually they can learn from these rules. The synergistic learning of implicit and explicit is the pattern that the mutual promotion is generated when implicit and explicit learning are coordinated, demonstrating the synergistic effect that the performance was significantly higher than any single learning.
Any separation of implicit and explicit learning is not consistent with realistic learning. So we should consider that implicit learning, explicit learning and synergistic learning of Implicit and explicit are combined together. Through discussing about the influencing factors, age differences and individual differences, it could more objectively show the characteristics of implicit learning and representational mechanism. Meanwhile, it could further clarify the relationship between implicit learning and learning efficiency, and deepen the study of learning nature.
This study selected subjects from students of grade four, grade five, grade six of primary school, grade one in junior high school and grade one in senior high school. From the aspect of material difficulty, it selected definite-state artificial grammar in which rules were more difficult and biconditional artificial grammar as lower. From the aspect of materials nature, this study selected real materials and artificial grammar materials. Used a much stronger implicit-explicit manipulation program, researcher divided learning style into the match task, the edit task, the match/editing task and alternate task, which were equivalent of implicit learning, explicit learning, first implicit learning and then explicit learning, alternate learning to inspect the developmental characteristics and rules of implicit learning as well as the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
This paper consists of five experiments:
Experiment 1 was to explore the generation of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit, the influence from difficulty level of materials to implicit learning and synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. It further revealed the relationship between the implicit learning and explicit learning, the transfer of implicit knowledge and its representational mechanism.
Experiment 2 randomly selected 480 students including four aging groups, which are from grade five and grade six of elementary school, grade one of junior high school and grade one of senior high school, to investigate the grades difference of implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit from the developmental view.
Experiment 3 selected rigorously 120 students good at study and 120 students with learning difficulties to explore the implicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit from the perspective of individual differences.
Experiment 4 selected 240 subjects through cluster sampling from each grade, which are grade four, grade five, grade six of elementary school and grade one of junior high school, mainly chose the real material with English lexical dual writing rules, to compare with the same rules in strings generated by an artificial grammar to study implicit learning of real materials, the developmental rules and characteristics of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
Experiment 5 randomly selected 90 students from each grade of grade four, five, six of primary school and grade one of junior high school, using the paradigm of instruction separation, to explore the implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit of meaningful real materials, and further clarify the role of consciousness in the implicit learning and the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit.
The results showed as follows:
(1) In process of artificial grammar materials learning at two difficulty levels, showed a significant effect of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. The best performance occurred in the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups; demonstrating the advantages of this learning mode. The performance in same letter sets learning of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups was significantly higher than that in different letter sets, suggesting that the rules of implicit learning can be transferred, while the transfer was affected by the surface characteristics of stimulus.
(2) Difference between implicit groups and explicit groups is not significant in grade five and grade six of primary schools, grade one of junior high school and grade one of senior high school. Performance of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups (first implicit then explicit and alternation) increased significantly since grade one of junior high school. Performance of students in grade one of senior high school is robustly higher than that of the other three grades.
(3) There is no significant difference in implicit learning performance between students good at study and students with learning difficulties. Performance of students good at study in explicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit and the alternate learning was significantly better than that of students with learning difficulties. Performance of students good at study in explicit learning, the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit was significantly higher than that in implicit learning. There are no significant differences between the performances of students with learning difficulties among four learning styles. These results suggested that role of consciousness in learning process is more important for students good at study than that for students with learning difficulties.
(4) Performance of real material synergistic learning of implicit and explicit groups was significantly better than that of the implicit or explicit learning groups. Under the same learning conditions, real materials groups performed significantly better than artificial grammar letter strings groups.
(5) On real learning materials task, performance of the implicit learning groups in grade four, five and six of elementary school and grade one of junior high school showed no significant differences. Performance of the synergistic learning of implicit groups and explicit groups gradually improved from low-grade to high-grade. The performance of students in grade six, grade one of junior high school was significantly higher than that of students in other grades, which indicated the developmental trend. The significant difference on artificial materials task with the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit didn't appear in groups from grade one of junior high school.
Based on above results, the abstract representation view concerning implicit knowledge is suitable to account for the characteristics and changes of the synergistic learning of implicit and explicit. The rules resulted from implicit learning can be transferred, but dually influenced by the rule structure and the total characteristics of stimulus. From the higher elementary grades to grade one of senior high school, synergistic learning of implicit and explicit effect is developmental and different individually on artificial grammar and real materials learning task. Consciousness plays a more important role in real materials learning task. Implicit learning mainly coordinates with explicit learning to influence learning efficiency.
引文
曹成刚.关于阅读中的外显与内隐问题研究.心理科学,2005,28(1):197-200
樊琪.科学探究技能的内隐与外显学习的比较研究.心理科学,2005,28(6):1375-1378
付秋芳,傅小兰.内隐学习中表征与意识的关系.心理科学进展,2006,14(1):18-22
高湘萍,徐欣颖,李慧渊.儿童绘图作业内隐学习智力独立性研究.心理科学,2005,28(4):863-867
高瑛.汉语阅读困难学生的内隐学习研究.西北师范大学硕士论文,2004
葛操,白学军,沈德立.注意与内隐序列学习的关系研究.心理科学,2007,30(5):1029-1032
郭秀艳,杨治良,周颖.意识无意识成分贡献的权衡现象--非文字再认条件下.心理学报,2003,35(4):441-446
郭秀艳,杨治良.内隐学习和外显学习的相互关系.心理学报,2002,34(4):351-356
郭秀艳,崔光成.内隐学习本质特征的实验研究.心理科学,2002,25(1):43-46
郭秀艳,葛晓菁,魏知超.诗歌内隐学习的实验研究.上海:第十届全国心理学学术大会,2005
郭秀艳,杨治良.内隐学习研究的核心方法-人工语法范式.应用心理学,2001,7(3):45-50
郭秀艳,邹玉梅,李强等.非文字内隐学习的优势效应.心理科学,2003,26(2):292-296
郭秀艳.内隐学习.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003
郭秀艳.内隐学习对技能类教学的启示.心理发展与教育,2004a,(1):87-91
郭秀艳.内隐学习与外显学习关系评述.心理科学进展,2004b,12(2):185-192
李林.学习与记忆中无意识过程的整合取向研究.华东师范大学博士论文,2005
林颖,周颖.注意和学习长度影响非显著协变关系内隐学习的初步研究.心理科学,2003,26(3):560-562
林颖.内隐学习机制及个体差异研究-发展的视角.华东师范大学博士论文,2003
刘耀中.论内隐学习的本质特征.湛江师范学院学报(哲社版),1998,19(2):93-96
聂晶.内隐学习的动态系统研究.华东师范大学博士论文,2005
邵志芳,陆峥.复杂规则内隐学习机制的实验研究.心理科学,2002,25(3):361-362
沈德立,白学军.高效率学习的心理机制研究.心理科学,2006,29(1):2-6
唐菁华,郭秀艳,秘晓冉.内隐学习研究的新趋向-真实材料的实验室研究.心理发展与教 育,2007,1:124-127
吴国来.内隐序列学习的发展研究.天津师范大学博士论文,2004
杨治良.学习和记忆的无意识研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(6):801-803
杨治良,高桦,郭力平.社会认知具有更强的内隐性--兼论内隐和外显的“钢筋水泥”关系.心理学报,1998,30(1):1-6
杨治良,李林.意识和无意识权衡现象的四个特征.心理科学,2003,26(6):962-966
杨治良,叶阁蔚.内隐学习“三高”特征的实验研究.心理科学,1993,16(3):138-144
虞旻泓,刘爱伦.内隐学习在第二语言语音学习中的作用.心理科学,2006,29(3):631-634
张冲.汉语儿童英语语音规则的内隐学习和外显学习.辽宁师范大学硕士论文,2004
张卫.序列位置内隐学习产生机制的实验研究.心理学报,2000,32(4):374-380
张妍铭.汉语儿童英语学习中的内隐学习和外显学习的关系研究.西北师范大学硕士论文,2003
钟启泉.差生的心理与教育.上海教育出版社,2003
周爱保,张妍铭等.汉语儿童英语语音特征内隐与外显学习的比较研究.心理科学,2004,27(1):120-123
Altmamn G T M,Dienes Z.Rule learning by seven-month-old infants and neural networks.Science,1999,284(5416):875
Altmamn G T M.Learning and development in neural networks:The importance of prior experience.Cognition,2002,85:43-50
Berry D C,Dimes Z.Implicit learning:Theoretical and empirical issues.Hove:Erlbaum Associates,1993
Berry D,Broadbent D.Interactive tasks and the implicit-explicit distinction.British Journal of Psychology,1988,79:251-272
Berry D,Broadbent D.On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalizable knowledge.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1984,36:209-231
Bowers K,Regehr G,Balthazard C,Parker.Intuition in the context of discovery.Cognitive Psychology,1990,22:72-110
Buchner R L,Wippich W.On the reliability of implicit and explicit memory measure.Cognitive Psychology,2000,40(3):227-259
Chaiken S,Trope Y.(Eds.).Dual process theories in social psychology.New York:Guilford Press,1999
Challis B,Velichkovski B,Craik F.Level-of-processing effects on a variety of memory tasks.Consciousness and Cognition,1996,5(1-2):142-164
Clark A,Karmiloff-Smith A.The cognizer's innards:A psychological and philosophical perspective on the development of thought.Mind and Language,1993,8(4):487-519
Cleeremans A,Jiménez L.Implicit sequence learning:the truth is in the details.In Stadler M A,Frensch P A(Eds.),Handbook of Implicit Learning.Thousand Oaks,CA:Sage,1998,323-364
Cleeremans A.Attention and awareness in sequence learning.In Proceedings of Cognitive Science Society Annual Conference,1993,330-335
Cleeremans A.Implicit Learning and Consciousness.Hove,UK:Psychology Press,2002,41-67
Cleeremans A.Principles for implicit learning.In Berry D(Ed.),How Implicit is Implicit Learning? Oxford University Press,1997.195-234
Cohen N J,Ivry R,Keele S W.Attention and structure in sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1990,16:17-30
Curran T,Keele S W.Attentional and nonattentionl forms of sequence learning.Journal of Experiment Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1993,19:189-202
Curran T.Implicit learning revealed by the method of opposition.Trends in Cognitive Science,2001,5:503-504
D' Eredita M A,Hoyer W J.Implicit and explicit learning of figural relation:Adult age difference.Memory and Cognition,1998
Destrebecqz A,Cleeremans A.Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2001,8(2):343-350
Dienes Z,Fahey R.The role of specific instances in controlling a dynamic system.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory and Cognition,1995,21:848-862
Dienes Z,Perner J.A theory of the implicit nature of implicit learning.In:French R M,Cleeremans A.Implicit Learning and Consciousness.Hove,UK:Psychology Press,2002,68-92
Dimes Z,Broadbent D E,Berry D.Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar Teaming. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1991, 17: 875-887
Doldrack R A, Selco S J, Field J E, Cohen N J. The relationship between skill Learning and repetition priming: Experimental and computational analyses. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1999,25: 208-235
Ellis N C. Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge in foreign language learning. In J. Chapelle, M-Th. Claus (Eds.), Memory and Memorization in Acquiring and Learning Languages. C L L. Centre de Langues a Louvain-la-Neuve et Woluwe, 1993.97-142
Evans J, Venn S, Feeney A. Implicit and explicit processes in a hypothesis testing task. British Journal of Psychology, 2002,93,31-46
Fletcher J, Maybery, M T, Bennett, S. Implicit learning differences: A question of developmental level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2000,26 (1): 246-252
Frensch P A, Buchner A, Lin J. Implicit learning of unique and ambiguous serial transitions in the presence and absence of a distractor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1994,20 (3): 567-584
Frensch P A, Wenke D, Runger D. A secondary tone-counting task suppresses expression of knowledge in the serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory and Cognition, 1999, 25: 260-274
Frensch P A. One concept, multiple meanings: On how to define the concept of implicit learning. In Stadler M A & Frensch P A (Eds.). Handbook of Implicit Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.47-104
Fum D, Stocco A. Outcome evaluation and procedural knowledge in implicit learning. In Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the cognitive science society. Boston, MA: Cognitive Science Society. 2003a, 426-431
Fum D, Stocco A. Instance vs. rule based learning in controlling a dynamic system. In Proceedings of the international conference on cognitive modeling. Bamberg, Germany: Universitats- Verlag Bamberg. 2003b, 105-110
Gasparini S. Implicit versus explicit learning: some implication for L2 teaching. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 2004,19(2): 203-219
Gibson F,Fichman M,Plaut D.Learning in dynamic decision tasks:Computational model and empirical evidence.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1997,71(1):1-35
Grafton S T,Hazeltine E,Ivry R.Functional mapping of sequence learning in normal human.Journal of Cognition,1995,7:497-510
Hazeltine E,Grafton S T,Ivry R.Attention and stimulus characteristics determined the locus of motor sequence encoding:A PET study.Brain,1997,120(1):123-140
Hayes N A,Broadbent D E.Two modes of learning for interactive tasks.Cognition,1998,28:249-276
Highham P A,Vokey J R,Pritchard J L.Beyond dissociation logic:evidence for controlled and automatic influences in artificial grammar learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,2000,129(4):457-470
Hill T,Lewicki P,et al.The role of learned inferential encoding rules in the perception of face:Effects of nonconscious self-perpetuation of a bias.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1990,26:350-371
Howard J H,Howard D V.Age differences in implicit learning of higher-order dependencies in serial patterns.Psychology and Aging.1998
Hsiao A T,Reber A S.The dual-task SRT procedure:fine-tuning the timing.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2001,8(2):336-342
Jacoby L L.A process dissociation framework:Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory and Language,1991,30(3):513-541
Jiang Y,Chun M M.Contextual cueing:Reciprocal influences between attention and implicit learning.In Jime'nez L(Ed.),Attention and Implicit learning,Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003.277-296
Jiang Y,Chun M M.Selective attention modulates implicit learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Experimental Psychology,2001,54:1105-1124
Jiménez L.Intention attention and consciousness in probabilistic sequence learning.In Jiménez L (Ed.),Attention and Implicit Learning,Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003.43-68
Jiménez L,Méndez C.Implicit sequence learning with competing explicit cues.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,2001,54:345-369
Jimenez L, Mendez C. Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1999,25:236-259
Jimenez L, Vaquero M M. Qualitative differences between implicit and explicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2006, 32(3): 475-490
Johnstone T, Shanks D R. Abstractionist and processing accounts of implicit learning. Cognitive Psychology, 2001,42:69-70
Johnstone T, Shanks D R. Two mechanisms in implicit artificial grammar learning? Comment on meulemans and Van der linden. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1999, 25,524-531
Keele S W, Ivry R, Mayr U, et al.Hazeltine E, Heuer H. The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 2003,110: 316-339
Lewicki P, Czyzewska M, Hoffman H. Unconscious acquisition of complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1987, 13(4): 523-530
LoganG Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 1988, 95(4): 492-527
Manza L, Peter A S. Representing artificial grmmars: Transfer across forms and modalities. In D C Berry (Ed): How implicit is implicit learning, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. 73-106
Mathews R C, Buss R R, Stanley W B, et al. Role of implicit and explicit processes in learning from examples: A synergistic effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1989,15(6): 1083-1100
Mathews R C. Comment: Abstractness of implicit grammar knowledge: comments on Perrchet and Pacteau's analysis of synthetic grammar learning. Journal of experimental psychology: general, 1990,119: 412- 416
Mathews R C. Is research painting a biased picture of implicit learning? The dangers of methodological purity in scientific debate. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1997, 4(1): 38-42
Maybery M, Taylor M, O'Brien-Malone A. Implicit learning: Sensitive to age but not 10. 103 Australian Journal of Psychology, 1995,47(1): 8-17
Mayr U. Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1996,22:350-364
McLeod P, Reed N, Dienes Z. How fielders arrive in time to catch the ball. Nature, 2003, 426 (6964): 244-245
Merikle P, Reingold E. Recognition and lexical decision without detection: Unconscious perception? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1991, 16:574-583
Meulemans T, Van der Linden M. Associative chunk strength in artificial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1997,4:1007-1028
Meyer D, Kieras D. A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and human multiple-task performance: Part 1, basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 1997, 104(l):3-65
Musen G, Squire L R. On the implicit learning of novel associations by amnesic patients and normal subjects. Neuropsychology, 1993,7(2): 119-135
Nissen M J, Bullemer P. Attentional requirement of learning: evidence from performance measure. Cognitive Psychology, 1987,19:1-32
O'Brien-Malone A, Maybery M. Implicit learning. In Kirsner K, Speelman C, Maybery M, et al. (Eds.), Implicit and Explicit Mental Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999.37-56
Olson I R, Chun M M. Temporal contextual cuing of visual attention. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2001,27(5): 1299-1313
Pacton S, Perruchet P, Fayol M, Cleeremans A. Implicit learning out of the lab: The case of orthographic regularitives. Journal of Experimental psychology: General, 2001, 130(3): 401-426
Perruchet P, Gallego J. A subjective unit formation account of implicit learning. In D Berry (Ed.), How implicit is implicit learning? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.124-161
Perruchet P, Pacteau C. Synthetic grammar learning: implicit rule abstraction or explicit . fragmentary knowledge? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1990,119: 264-275
Perruchet P, Viner A. The self-organising consciousness: A framework for implicit learning. In: French R M, Cleeremans A. Implicit Learning and Consciousness. Hove, UK: Psychology Press, 2002,41-67
Perruchet P, Vinter A, PacteauC, Gallego J. The formation units in artificial grammar teaming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2002,55(2): 485-503
Reber A S, Walkenfeld F F, Hernstadt R. Implicit and explicit learning-individual difference and IQ. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1991, 17(5): 888-896
Reber A S. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1989,118:219-235
Reber A S. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cogtitive unconscious. Oxford university press, New York, 1993
Reber A S. Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 1967,77:317-327
Reber A S. Implicit learning of syntactic languages: The role of structional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1976,2(1): 88~94
Reber P J, Gitelman D R, et al. Dissociating explicit and implicit category knowledge with fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2003,15:574-583
Reber P J, Squire L R. Parallel brain systems for learning with and without awareness. Learning and Memory, 1994,1:217-229
Rowland L A, Shanks D R. Sequence learning and selection difficulty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2006,32(2): 287-299
Russeler J, Hennighausen E, et al. Difference in incidental and intentional learning of sensorimoter sequence as revealed by event-related brain potential. Cognitive Brain Research, 2003, 15: 116-126
Schneider W, R M Shiffrin. Controlled and automatic human information processing: Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 1977, 84: 1-66
Servan-Schreiber E, Anderson J R. Learning artificial grammars with competitive chunking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1990,16: 592-608
Shanks D R, John M F. Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,1994,17:367-447
Shanks D R,Johnstone T,Staggs L.Abstraction processes in artificial grammar learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1997,50:26-252
Shanks D R,Lovibond P F.Autonomic and eyeblink conditioning are closely related to contingency awareness:Reply to Wiens & Ohman and Manns et al.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Animal Behavior Processes,2002,28:38-42
Shanks D R.Attention and awareness in implicit sequence learning.In Jimenez L(Ed.),Attention and implicit learning.Amsterdam:Benjamins,2003.11-42
Shanks D R.Attentional load and implicit sequence learning.Psychological Research,2005,69:369-382
Shin Y W,Lee J S,et al.The influence of complexes on implicit learning.Journal of Analytical Psychology,2005,50(2):175-191
Slusarz P,Sun R.Proceeding of cognitive science society conference.Edirburgh.2001,952-957
Stadler M A.The role of attention in implicit sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1995,21:674-685
Sun R,Slusarz P,Terry C.The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning:A dual-process approach.Psychological Review,2005,112(1):159-192
Sun R,Zhang X,Slusarz P,Mathews R.The interaction of implicit learning,explicit hypothesis testing learning and implicit-to-explicit knowledge extraction.Neural Networks 2006,doi:10.1016/jneunet.2006.07.02
Sun R,Zhang X.Top-down versus bottom-up learning in cognitive skill acquisition.Cognitive Systems Research,2004,5:63-89
Vinter A,Perrnchet P.Isolating unconscious influences:the neutral parameter procedure.Journal of Experimental Psychology,1999,4:857-875
Vokey J R,Brooks L R.Taming the clever unconscious:Analogic and abstractive strategies in artificial grammarlearning.Cognition,1992
Vokey J R,Brooks L R.Salience of item knowledge in learning artificial grammar.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1992,20:328-344
Whittlesea B W,Dorken M D.Incidentally,things in general are particularly determined:An episodic·processing account of implicit learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1993,122: 227-248
Whittlesea B W, Williams L D. Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 1998,141-165
Willingham H B, Greenberg A R, Thomas R C. Response to stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning, but does affect performance. Memory & cognition, 1997, 24(4): 534-542
Yong-Wook Shin, Joong-Sun Lee, Oh-Su Han, et al. The influence of complexes on implicit learning. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 2005,50(2): 175-190
樊琪.科学探究技能的内隐与外显学习的比较研究.心理科学,2005,28(6):1375-1378
付秋芳,傅小兰.内隐学习中表征与意识的关系.心理科学进展,2006,14(1):18-22
高湘萍,徐欣颖,李慧渊.儿童绘图作业内隐学习智力独立性研究.心理科学,2005,28(4):863-867
高瑛.汉语阅读困难学生的内隐学习研究.西北师范大学硕士论文,2004
葛操,白学军,沈德立.注意与内隐序列学习的关系研究.心理科学,2007,30(5):1029-1032
郭秀艳,杨治良,周颖.意识无意识成分贡献的权衡现象--非文字再认条件下.心理学报,2003,35(4):441-446
郭秀艳,杨治良.内隐学习和外显学习的相互关系.心理学报,2002,34(4):351-356
郭秀艳,崔光成.内隐学习本质特征的实验研究.心理科学,2002,25(1):43-46
郭秀艳,葛晓菁,魏知超.诗歌内隐学习的实验研究.上海:第十届全国心理学学术大会,2005
郭秀艳,杨治良.内隐学习研究的核心方法-人工语法范式.应用心理学,2001,7(3):45-50
郭秀艳,邹玉梅,李强等.非文字内隐学习的优势效应.心理科学,2003,26(2):292-296
郭秀艳.内隐学习.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003
郭秀艳.内隐学习对技能类教学的启示.心理发展与教育,2004a,(1):87-91
郭秀艳.内隐学习与外显学习关系评述.心理科学进展,2004b,12(2):185-192
李林.学习与记忆中无意识过程的整合取向研究.华东师范大学博士论文,2005
林颖,周颖.注意和学习长度影响非显著协变关系内隐学习的初步研究.心理科学,2003,26(3):560-562
林颖.内隐学习机制及个体差异研究-发展的视角.华东师范大学博士论文,2003
刘耀中.论内隐学习的本质特征.湛江师范学院学报(哲社版),1998,19(2):93-96
聂晶.内隐学习的动态系统研究.华东师范大学博士论文,2005
邵志芳,陆峥.复杂规则内隐学习机制的实验研究.心理科学,2002,25(3):361-362
沈德立,白学军.高效率学习的心理机制研究.心理科学,2006,29(1):2-6
唐菁华,郭秀艳,秘晓冉.内隐学习研究的新趋向-真实材料的实验室研究.心理发展与教 育,2007,1:124-127
吴国来.内隐序列学习的发展研究.天津师范大学博士论文,2004
杨治良.学习和记忆的无意识研究.心理科学进展,2006,14(6):801-803
杨治良,高桦,郭力平.社会认知具有更强的内隐性--兼论内隐和外显的“钢筋水泥”关系.心理学报,1998,30(1):1-6
杨治良,李林.意识和无意识权衡现象的四个特征.心理科学,2003,26(6):962-966
杨治良,叶阁蔚.内隐学习“三高”特征的实验研究.心理科学,1993,16(3):138-144
虞旻泓,刘爱伦.内隐学习在第二语言语音学习中的作用.心理科学,2006,29(3):631-634
张冲.汉语儿童英语语音规则的内隐学习和外显学习.辽宁师范大学硕士论文,2004
张卫.序列位置内隐学习产生机制的实验研究.心理学报,2000,32(4):374-380
张妍铭.汉语儿童英语学习中的内隐学习和外显学习的关系研究.西北师范大学硕士论文,2003
钟启泉.差生的心理与教育.上海教育出版社,2003
周爱保,张妍铭等.汉语儿童英语语音特征内隐与外显学习的比较研究.心理科学,2004,27(1):120-123
Altmamn G T M,Dienes Z.Rule learning by seven-month-old infants and neural networks.Science,1999,284(5416):875
Altmamn G T M.Learning and development in neural networks:The importance of prior experience.Cognition,2002,85:43-50
Berry D C,Dimes Z.Implicit learning:Theoretical and empirical issues.Hove:Erlbaum Associates,1993
Berry D,Broadbent D.Interactive tasks and the implicit-explicit distinction.British Journal of Psychology,1988,79:251-272
Berry D,Broadbent D.On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalizable knowledge.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1984,36:209-231
Bowers K,Regehr G,Balthazard C,Parker.Intuition in the context of discovery.Cognitive Psychology,1990,22:72-110
Buchner R L,Wippich W.On the reliability of implicit and explicit memory measure.Cognitive Psychology,2000,40(3):227-259
Chaiken S,Trope Y.(Eds.).Dual process theories in social psychology.New York:Guilford Press,1999
Challis B,Velichkovski B,Craik F.Level-of-processing effects on a variety of memory tasks.Consciousness and Cognition,1996,5(1-2):142-164
Clark A,Karmiloff-Smith A.The cognizer's innards:A psychological and philosophical perspective on the development of thought.Mind and Language,1993,8(4):487-519
Cleeremans A,Jiménez L.Implicit sequence learning:the truth is in the details.In Stadler M A,Frensch P A(Eds.),Handbook of Implicit Learning.Thousand Oaks,CA:Sage,1998,323-364
Cleeremans A.Attention and awareness in sequence learning.In Proceedings of Cognitive Science Society Annual Conference,1993,330-335
Cleeremans A.Implicit Learning and Consciousness.Hove,UK:Psychology Press,2002,41-67
Cleeremans A.Principles for implicit learning.In Berry D(Ed.),How Implicit is Implicit Learning? Oxford University Press,1997.195-234
Cohen N J,Ivry R,Keele S W.Attention and structure in sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1990,16:17-30
Curran T,Keele S W.Attentional and nonattentionl forms of sequence learning.Journal of Experiment Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1993,19:189-202
Curran T.Implicit learning revealed by the method of opposition.Trends in Cognitive Science,2001,5:503-504
D' Eredita M A,Hoyer W J.Implicit and explicit learning of figural relation:Adult age difference.Memory and Cognition,1998
Destrebecqz A,Cleeremans A.Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2001,8(2):343-350
Dienes Z,Fahey R.The role of specific instances in controlling a dynamic system.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory and Cognition,1995,21:848-862
Dienes Z,Perner J.A theory of the implicit nature of implicit learning.In:French R M,Cleeremans A.Implicit Learning and Consciousness.Hove,UK:Psychology Press,2002,68-92
Dimes Z,Broadbent D E,Berry D.Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar Teaming. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1991, 17: 875-887
Doldrack R A, Selco S J, Field J E, Cohen N J. The relationship between skill Learning and repetition priming: Experimental and computational analyses. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1999,25: 208-235
Ellis N C. Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge in foreign language learning. In J. Chapelle, M-Th. Claus (Eds.), Memory and Memorization in Acquiring and Learning Languages. C L L. Centre de Langues a Louvain-la-Neuve et Woluwe, 1993.97-142
Evans J, Venn S, Feeney A. Implicit and explicit processes in a hypothesis testing task. British Journal of Psychology, 2002,93,31-46
Fletcher J, Maybery, M T, Bennett, S. Implicit learning differences: A question of developmental level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2000,26 (1): 246-252
Frensch P A, Buchner A, Lin J. Implicit learning of unique and ambiguous serial transitions in the presence and absence of a distractor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1994,20 (3): 567-584
Frensch P A, Wenke D, Runger D. A secondary tone-counting task suppresses expression of knowledge in the serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory and Cognition, 1999, 25: 260-274
Frensch P A. One concept, multiple meanings: On how to define the concept of implicit learning. In Stadler M A & Frensch P A (Eds.). Handbook of Implicit Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.47-104
Fum D, Stocco A. Outcome evaluation and procedural knowledge in implicit learning. In Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the cognitive science society. Boston, MA: Cognitive Science Society. 2003a, 426-431
Fum D, Stocco A. Instance vs. rule based learning in controlling a dynamic system. In Proceedings of the international conference on cognitive modeling. Bamberg, Germany: Universitats- Verlag Bamberg. 2003b, 105-110
Gasparini S. Implicit versus explicit learning: some implication for L2 teaching. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 2004,19(2): 203-219
Gibson F,Fichman M,Plaut D.Learning in dynamic decision tasks:Computational model and empirical evidence.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,1997,71(1):1-35
Grafton S T,Hazeltine E,Ivry R.Functional mapping of sequence learning in normal human.Journal of Cognition,1995,7:497-510
Hazeltine E,Grafton S T,Ivry R.Attention and stimulus characteristics determined the locus of motor sequence encoding:A PET study.Brain,1997,120(1):123-140
Hayes N A,Broadbent D E.Two modes of learning for interactive tasks.Cognition,1998,28:249-276
Highham P A,Vokey J R,Pritchard J L.Beyond dissociation logic:evidence for controlled and automatic influences in artificial grammar learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,2000,129(4):457-470
Hill T,Lewicki P,et al.The role of learned inferential encoding rules in the perception of face:Effects of nonconscious self-perpetuation of a bias.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1990,26:350-371
Howard J H,Howard D V.Age differences in implicit learning of higher-order dependencies in serial patterns.Psychology and Aging.1998
Hsiao A T,Reber A S.The dual-task SRT procedure:fine-tuning the timing.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,2001,8(2):336-342
Jacoby L L.A process dissociation framework:Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory and Language,1991,30(3):513-541
Jiang Y,Chun M M.Contextual cueing:Reciprocal influences between attention and implicit learning.In Jime'nez L(Ed.),Attention and Implicit learning,Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003.277-296
Jiang Y,Chun M M.Selective attention modulates implicit learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Experimental Psychology,2001,54:1105-1124
Jiménez L.Intention attention and consciousness in probabilistic sequence learning.In Jiménez L (Ed.),Attention and Implicit Learning,Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003.43-68
Jiménez L,Méndez C.Implicit sequence learning with competing explicit cues.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,2001,54:345-369
Jimenez L, Mendez C. Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1999,25:236-259
Jimenez L, Vaquero M M. Qualitative differences between implicit and explicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2006, 32(3): 475-490
Johnstone T, Shanks D R. Abstractionist and processing accounts of implicit learning. Cognitive Psychology, 2001,42:69-70
Johnstone T, Shanks D R. Two mechanisms in implicit artificial grammar learning? Comment on meulemans and Van der linden. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1999, 25,524-531
Keele S W, Ivry R, Mayr U, et al.Hazeltine E, Heuer H. The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. Psychological Review, 2003,110: 316-339
Lewicki P, Czyzewska M, Hoffman H. Unconscious acquisition of complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1987, 13(4): 523-530
LoganG Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 1988, 95(4): 492-527
Manza L, Peter A S. Representing artificial grmmars: Transfer across forms and modalities. In D C Berry (Ed): How implicit is implicit learning, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. 73-106
Mathews R C, Buss R R, Stanley W B, et al. Role of implicit and explicit processes in learning from examples: A synergistic effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1989,15(6): 1083-1100
Mathews R C. Comment: Abstractness of implicit grammar knowledge: comments on Perrchet and Pacteau's analysis of synthetic grammar learning. Journal of experimental psychology: general, 1990,119: 412- 416
Mathews R C. Is research painting a biased picture of implicit learning? The dangers of methodological purity in scientific debate. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1997, 4(1): 38-42
Maybery M, Taylor M, O'Brien-Malone A. Implicit learning: Sensitive to age but not 10. 103 Australian Journal of Psychology, 1995,47(1): 8-17
Mayr U. Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1996,22:350-364
McLeod P, Reed N, Dienes Z. How fielders arrive in time to catch the ball. Nature, 2003, 426 (6964): 244-245
Merikle P, Reingold E. Recognition and lexical decision without detection: Unconscious perception? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1991, 16:574-583
Meulemans T, Van der Linden M. Associative chunk strength in artificial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1997,4:1007-1028
Meyer D, Kieras D. A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and human multiple-task performance: Part 1, basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 1997, 104(l):3-65
Musen G, Squire L R. On the implicit learning of novel associations by amnesic patients and normal subjects. Neuropsychology, 1993,7(2): 119-135
Nissen M J, Bullemer P. Attentional requirement of learning: evidence from performance measure. Cognitive Psychology, 1987,19:1-32
O'Brien-Malone A, Maybery M. Implicit learning. In Kirsner K, Speelman C, Maybery M, et al. (Eds.), Implicit and Explicit Mental Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999.37-56
Olson I R, Chun M M. Temporal contextual cuing of visual attention. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2001,27(5): 1299-1313
Pacton S, Perruchet P, Fayol M, Cleeremans A. Implicit learning out of the lab: The case of orthographic regularitives. Journal of Experimental psychology: General, 2001, 130(3): 401-426
Perruchet P, Gallego J. A subjective unit formation account of implicit learning. In D Berry (Ed.), How implicit is implicit learning? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.124-161
Perruchet P, Pacteau C. Synthetic grammar learning: implicit rule abstraction or explicit . fragmentary knowledge? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1990,119: 264-275
Perruchet P, Viner A. The self-organising consciousness: A framework for implicit learning. In: French R M, Cleeremans A. Implicit Learning and Consciousness. Hove, UK: Psychology Press, 2002,41-67
Perruchet P, Vinter A, PacteauC, Gallego J. The formation units in artificial grammar teaming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2002,55(2): 485-503
Reber A S, Walkenfeld F F, Hernstadt R. Implicit and explicit learning-individual difference and IQ. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1991, 17(5): 888-896
Reber A S. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1989,118:219-235
Reber A S. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cogtitive unconscious. Oxford university press, New York, 1993
Reber A S. Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 1967,77:317-327
Reber A S. Implicit learning of syntactic languages: The role of structional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1976,2(1): 88~94
Reber P J, Gitelman D R, et al. Dissociating explicit and implicit category knowledge with fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2003,15:574-583
Reber P J, Squire L R. Parallel brain systems for learning with and without awareness. Learning and Memory, 1994,1:217-229
Rowland L A, Shanks D R. Sequence learning and selection difficulty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2006,32(2): 287-299
Russeler J, Hennighausen E, et al. Difference in incidental and intentional learning of sensorimoter sequence as revealed by event-related brain potential. Cognitive Brain Research, 2003, 15: 116-126
Schneider W, R M Shiffrin. Controlled and automatic human information processing: Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 1977, 84: 1-66
Servan-Schreiber E, Anderson J R. Learning artificial grammars with competitive chunking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1990,16: 592-608
Shanks D R, John M F. Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,1994,17:367-447
Shanks D R,Johnstone T,Staggs L.Abstraction processes in artificial grammar learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1997,50:26-252
Shanks D R,Lovibond P F.Autonomic and eyeblink conditioning are closely related to contingency awareness:Reply to Wiens & Ohman and Manns et al.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Animal Behavior Processes,2002,28:38-42
Shanks D R.Attention and awareness in implicit sequence learning.In Jimenez L(Ed.),Attention and implicit learning.Amsterdam:Benjamins,2003.11-42
Shanks D R.Attentional load and implicit sequence learning.Psychological Research,2005,69:369-382
Shin Y W,Lee J S,et al.The influence of complexes on implicit learning.Journal of Analytical Psychology,2005,50(2):175-191
Slusarz P,Sun R.Proceeding of cognitive science society conference.Edirburgh.2001,952-957
Stadler M A.The role of attention in implicit sequence learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1995,21:674-685
Sun R,Slusarz P,Terry C.The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning:A dual-process approach.Psychological Review,2005,112(1):159-192
Sun R,Zhang X,Slusarz P,Mathews R.The interaction of implicit learning,explicit hypothesis testing learning and implicit-to-explicit knowledge extraction.Neural Networks 2006,doi:10.1016/jneunet.2006.07.02
Sun R,Zhang X.Top-down versus bottom-up learning in cognitive skill acquisition.Cognitive Systems Research,2004,5:63-89
Vinter A,Perrnchet P.Isolating unconscious influences:the neutral parameter procedure.Journal of Experimental Psychology,1999,4:857-875
Vokey J R,Brooks L R.Taming the clever unconscious:Analogic and abstractive strategies in artificial grammarlearning.Cognition,1992
Vokey J R,Brooks L R.Salience of item knowledge in learning artificial grammar.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory,and Cognition,1992,20:328-344
Whittlesea B W,Dorken M D.Incidentally,things in general are particularly determined:An episodic·processing account of implicit learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1993,122: 227-248
Whittlesea B W, Williams L D. Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 1998,141-165
Willingham H B, Greenberg A R, Thomas R C. Response to stimulus interval does not affect implicit motor sequence learning, but does affect performance. Memory & cognition, 1997, 24(4): 534-542
Yong-Wook Shin, Joong-Sun Lee, Oh-Su Han, et al. The influence of complexes on implicit learning. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 2005,50(2): 175-190