Silva Susana, Inácio Filomena, Folia Vasiliki, Petersson Karl Magnus
Psychology Department, Center for Psychology, University of Porto.
Psychology Department, Center for Biomedical Research, University of Algarve.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2017 Sep;43(9):1387-1402. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000350. Epub 2017 Mar 13.
Artificial grammar learning (AGL) has been probed with forced-choice behavioral tests (active tests). Recent attempts to probe the outcomes of learning (implicitly acquired knowledge) with eye-movement responses (passive tests) have shown null results. However, these latter studies have not tested for sensitivity effects, for example, increased eye movements on a printed violation. In this study, we tested for sensitivity effects in AGL tests with (Experiment 1) and without (Experiment 2) concurrent active tests (preference- and grammaticality classification) in an eye-tracking experiment. Eye movements discriminated between sequence types in passive tests and more so in active tests. The eye-movement profile did not differ between preference and grammaticality classification, and it resembled sensitivity effects commonly observed in natural syntax processing. Our findings show that the outcomes of implicit structured sequence learning can be characterized in eye tracking. More specifically, whole trial measures (dwell time, number of fixations) showed robust AGL effects, whereas first-pass measures (first-fixation duration) did not. Furthermore, our findings strengthen the link between artificial and natural syntax processing, and they shed light on the factors that determine performance differences in preference and grammaticality classification tests. (PsycINFO Database Record
人工语法学习（AGL）已通过强制选择行为测试（主动测试）进行探究。最近尝试用眼动反应（被动测试）来探究学习结果（隐性获得的知识），结果却为阴性。然而，这些后期研究并未测试敏感性效应，例如，在打印的违规情况上眼动增加。在本研究中，我们在一项眼动追踪实验中，测试了有（实验1）和没有（实验2）同时进行的主动测试（偏好和语法性分类）的AGL测试中的敏感性效应。在被动测试中，眼动能区分序列类型，在主动测试中更是如此。眼动模式在偏好和语法性分类之间并无差异，且类似于自然句法处理中常见的敏感性效应。我们的研究结果表明，隐性结构化序列学习的结果可用眼动追踪来表征。更具体地说，整体试验指标（注视时间、注视次数）显示出强大的AGL效应，而首次通过指标（首次注视持续时间）则不然。此外，我们的研究结果加强了人工句法处理与自然句法处理之间的联系，并揭示了在偏好和语法性分类测试中决定表现差异的因素。（PsycINFO数据库记录）
