ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (7): 779-788.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00779

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇


卢张龙(), 刘梦娜, 刘玉洁, 马盼盼, 张瑞平()   

  1. 郑州大学教育学院, 郑州 450001
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-06 发布日期:2022-05-16 出版日期:2022-07-25
  • 通讯作者: 卢张龙,张瑞平;
  • 基金资助:

Exploring the representational mechanism of implicit sequence learning: Evidence from eye movements

LU Zhanglong(), LIU Mengna, LIU Yujie, MA Panpan, ZHANG Ruiping()   

  1. School of Education, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China
  • Received:2021-08-06 Online:2022-05-16 Published:2022-07-25
  • Contact: LU Zhanglong,ZHANG Ruiping;


内隐序列学习的表征机制是内隐学习研究领域的基本问题, 还存在争议。采用眼动追踪技术, 通过3个实验探讨内隐序列学习的表征机制。结果发现, 知觉序列混合眼跳和反应序列混合眼跳条件下发生序列学习; 朝向眼跳和反向眼跳条件下发生序列学习; 有、无分心反向眼跳下发生序列学习, 两者序列学习量差异不显著。整个研究表明, 内隐序列学习的表征依赖于序列信息。

关键词: 序列学习, 表征, 反向眼跳, 混合眼跳, 眼动


The representational mechanism of implicit sequence learning is one of the basic problems in the field of implicit learning, and it remains unclear. Three key theories have been proposed to demonstrate the representational mechanism of implicit sequence learning: stimulus-stimulus association learning (S-S), response-response association learning (R-R), and stimulus-response association learning (S-R). Most studies of implicit sequence learning employed reaction time as a dependent variable to investigate the representational mechanism. However, using reaction time directly in the model may not be ideal as the measured reaction time has several limitations that may confuse the results. For example, the baseline of reaction time may vary across different age groups. In order to overcome the shortcomings of reaction time, the present research applied an eye movement tracking technique and used the saccadic response time as the dependent variable.

In the current study, prosaccade and antisaccade trials in single or mixed tasks were investigated with eye movements, which were recorded using an EyeLink 1000 plus eye-tracker (SR Research inc., Canada). In a prosaccade trial, the subject was asked to look towards a newly appearing target, while in an antisaccade trial, a saccade of the subject to the location opposite to the appeared target was required. Three sets of experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, forty (40) college students completed the mixed tasks which included both the prosaccade tasks (red target) and the antisaccade tasks (green target). The participants were randomly assigned to a stimulus sequence group (i.e. stimulus followed the sequence) or a response sequence group (i.e. response followed the sequence). In Experiment 2, thirty-eight (38) college students completed either the prosaccade tasks or antisaccade tasks by the instruction of experiment 2. In Experiment 3, two distractors which had one of the same features as the target (color/shape) were added in the trial.Thirty-eight (38) college students completed the distractor task or the no distractor task.

The results showed that: (1) In the mixed saccadic tasks, there was implicit sequence learning in the stimulus sequence condition and in the response sequence condition; (2) in the single saccadic tasks, there was implicit sequence learning in the prosaccade condition and in the antisaccade condition. However, significant difference in the sequence learning scores between the mixed saccadic tasks and the single saccadic tasks was observed; (3) in the distractor tasks, there was implicit sequence learning in the distractor task condition and in the no distractor task condition.

The results of the current three experiments indicate that the representational mechanism of implicit sequence learning includes learning of multiple sequences: stimulus-stimulus associations learning (S-S); response-response associations learning (R-R); and stimulus-response associations learning (S-R).

Key words: sequence learning, representation, antisaccade, mixed saccade, eye movements