ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2013, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (12): 1313-1323.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2013.01313

• 论文 •    下一篇

多通道与单通道的内隐学习效应比较

石文典;李秀君;王维;严文华   

  1. (1上海师范大学教育学院, 上海 200234) (2华东师范大学心理与认知科学学院, 上海 200062)
  • 收稿日期:2012-12-18 出版日期:2013-12-25 发布日期:2013-12-25
  • 通讯作者: 严文华
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金项目“教师隐性知识的来源、心理特征及其认知神经机制(31160201)”资助。

Comparison of Implicit Learning Effect between Multisensory and Unisensory

SHI Wendian;LI Xiujun;WANG Wei;YAN Wenhua   

  1. (1 Education School of Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China) (2 School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China)
  • Received:2012-12-18 Online:2013-12-25 Published:2013-12-25
  • Contact: YAN Wenhua

摘要:

内隐学习所获得的知识在多大程度上是感觉通道依赖的(modality-dependent)或是抽象表征的(abstract representation), 一直存在很大争论。本研究以169名大学生为被试, 以人工语法为学习任务, 在视听通道同时呈现相同规则或不同规则的语法, 以考查被试是否能够同时习得两个通道的语法规则。结果发现:视听双通道同时呈现的语法规则无论相同还是不同, 双通道的内隐学习成绩与单通道的内隐学习成绩均没有显著差异。本研究表明:双通道的内隐学习具有和单通道近乎一样的学习效应, 被试能够同时跟踪呈现在视听两个通道且不论规则是否相同的两套序列, 表明学习者具有多重感官的内隐学习能力; 而多重感官的内隐学习可以同时且独立发生, 也许表明多重学习子系统的存在。本研究的结果支持内隐学习的通道特异性特点, 挑战了抽象表征的传统理论。

关键词: 内隐学习, 通道, 通道特异性, 抽象表征

Abstract:

There is a controversy between two models (modality-dependent versus abstract representations) concerning knowledge gaining in the cognitive psychology in recent years. Some studies showed that participants gained their knowledge base on the legal regularities (Barbey & Wilson, 2003), and gained their implicit learning not only across letter sets, but also across sense modalities (Tunney & Altmann, 2001; Kirkham, Slemmer, & Johnson, 2002). Transfer effects are explained by proposing that the learning is based on abstract knowledge, that is, knowledge is not directly tied to the surface features or sensory instantiation of the stimuli (Pena, Bonatti, Nespor, & Mehler, 2002). On the contrary, other studies showed different results that supposedly grounded in modality-specific sensorimotor mechanisms demonstrating implicit learning is not only sensitive to stimulus-specific features (e.g., Chang, Knowlton, 2004) but also to modality-specific features (e.g., Barsalou, Simmons, Barbey, & Wilson, 2003; Conway & Christiansen, 2005, 2006, 2009; Emberson, 2011). Therefore it needs more exploration about the root of implicit learning which employs a central mechanism or multiple modality-specific mechanisms. Previous researches mainly focus on comparison of single modality, but the sensory environment is seldom limited to a single modality or input source (Stein & Stanford, 2008), thus it is possible that implicit learning may use simultaneously both auditory and visual modalities. The objective of current research is to explore to what extent multimodal input sources are processed independently. There were 169 college students took part into three experiments. Artificial Grammar Learning task was used. In Experiment 1, visual and auditory implicit learning effects were measured respectively, and the result of Experiment 1 provided a baseline learning rate for comparison in subsequent experiments. In Experiment 2, audiovisual sequences were presented simultaneously with the same grammar rules. In Experiment 3, audiovisual sequences were presented simultaneously with the different grammar rules. Results showed that: (1) there was significant implicit learning effect both for visual and auditory. (2) there was marginally significant implicit learning effect on visual and auditory when audiovisual sequences were presented simultaneously with the same grammar rules; and there were no significant differences between unisensory and multisensory. (3) There were significant implicit learning effects both of visual and auditory when audiovisual sequences were presented simultaneously with the different grammar rules, and there were no significant differences between unisensory and multisensory. One conclusion of current research is that multisensory has almost the same implicit learning effect as unisensory. Participants are able to track simultaneously two sets of sequential regularities regardless of the similarity of grammar rules, which indicates learners possess multisensory implicit learning ability. Multistream statistical learning is processed independently for each modality which perhaps indicates the involvement of multiple learning subsystems. The research result supports implicit learning’s modality-specific theory and challenges abstract representation’s theory.

Key words: implicit learning, modality, modality-specific, abstract presentation