↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

How Explicit and Implicit Test Instructions in an Implicit Learning Task Affect Performance

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
How Explicit and Implicit Test Instructions in an Implicit Learning Task Affect Performance
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0053296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnaud Witt, Ira Puspitawati, Annie Vinter

Abstract

Typically developing children aged 5 to 8 years were exposed to artificial grammar learning. Following an implicit exposure phase, half of the participants received neutral instructions at test while the other half received instructions making a direct, explicit reference to the training phase. We first aimed to assess whether implicit learning operated in the two test conditions. We then evaluated the differential impact of age on learning performances as a function of test instructions. The results showed that performance did not vary as a function of age in the implicit instructions condition, while age effects emerged when explicit instructions were employed at test. However, performance was affected differently by age and the instructions given at test, depending on whether the implicit learning of short or long units was assessed. These results suggest that the claim that the implicit learning process is independent of age needs to be revised.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 21%
Researcher 14 17%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Professor 7 8%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 40%
Sports and Recreations 8 10%
Linguistics 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 10 12%