The literature on repetition processing reveals an intriguing paradox between the particular salience of repetitions, which makes them easy to learn, and a tendency to avoid them when generating sequences. The aim of this experiment was to study the extent to which children can learn to produce these avoided behaviours by means of an artificial grammar paradigm using generation tests with implicit or explicit instructions. The analysis of the control group's performance confirmed the presence of a spontaneous tendency to avoid generating repetitions. A comparison with chance revealed that the children learned to produce repetitions in the explicit test but not in the implicit test. However, a comparison with the control group showed that learning nonetheless occurred in the experimental group with the implicit test. The discussion focused on this antirepetition behavioural bias and how it interacted with the type of information processes elicited by the tests selected for assessing implicit learning effects.
AttneaveF. (1954). Some informational aspects of visual perception.Psychological Review61, 183–193.
2.
CoetzeeA. (2005). The obligatory contour principle in the perception of English.Prosodies, FrotaS.VigarioM.FreitasM. J.New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter223–245.
3.
DienesZ.AltmannG. (2003). Measuring learning using an untrained control group: Comment on R. Reber and Perruchet.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology56A, 1117–123.
4.
DulanyD. E.CarlsonA.DeweyG. I. (1984). A case of syntactical learning and judgment: How conscious and how abstract?.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General113, 541–555.
5.
EndressA. D.Dehaene-LambertzG.MehlerJ. (2007). Perceptual constraints and the learnability of simple grammars.Cognition105, 577–614.
6.
FrithU. (1972). Cognitive mechanisms in autism: Experiments with color and tone sequence production.Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia2, 160–173.
7.
GomezR. L.GerkenL.SchvaneveldtR. W. (2000). The basis of transfer in artificial grammar learning.Memory and Cognition28, 253–263.
8.
HensonR. N. A. (1998). Item repetition in short-term memory: Ranschburg repeated.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition24, 1162–1181.
9.
HerzogG. R. (1989). The subjective-randomness theory: Experiments on the conceptualization of the formation of random sequences.Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie36, 199–220.
10.
KingstonJ.ChamblessD.MashD.KatzJ.BrennerE.KawaharaS. (June, 2006). Sequential contrast and the perception of co-articulated segments, Poster presented at the 10th Conference on Laboratory Phonology, Paris, France.
11.
LotzA.KinderA. (2006). Transfer in artificial grammar learning: The role of repetition information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition32, 707–715.
12.
MarcusG.VijayanS.RaoS.VishtonP. M. (1999). Rule learning by seven-month-old infants.Science283, 77–80.
13.
MitteneckerE. (1958). Analysis of sequences of “chance” action.Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie5, 45–60.
14.
MonaghanP.RowsonC. (2008). The effect of repetition and similarity on sequence learning.Memory and Cognition36, 1509–1514.
15.
PerlmanA.TzelgovJ. (2006). Interactions between encoding and retrieval in the domain of sequence-learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition32, 1118–130.
16.
PerruchetP.ReberR. (2003). Why untrained control groups provide invalid baselines: A reply to Dienes & Altmann.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology56A, 125–130.
17.
RabinovitzF. M.DunlapW. P.GrantM. J.CampioneJ. C. (1989). The rules used by children and adults in attempting to generate random numbers.Journal of Mathematical Psychology33, 227–287.
18.
ReberA. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior6, 855–863.
19.
ReberR.PerruchetP. (2003). The use of control groups in artificial grammar learning.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology56A, 97–116.
20.
RichardsN. (2006). A distinctness condition on linearization, Unpublished manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA.
21.
ShanksD. R. (2005). Implicit learning.Handbook of cognition, LambertsK.GoldstoneR.London, UK: Sage202–220.
22.
ShanksD. R.St. JohnM. (1994). Parallel brain systems for learning with and without awareness.Brain and Behavior Science17, 367–447.
23.
TunneyR. J.AltmannG. T. M. (1999). The transfer effect in artificial grammar learning: Re-appraising the evidence of transfer of sequential dependencies.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition25, 1322–1333.
24.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.Science185, 1124–1131.
25.
Van SommersP. (1984). Drawing and cognition, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
VinterA.PerruchetP. (1999). Isolating unconscious influences: The neutral parameter procedure.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology52A, 857–875.
27.
VinterA.PerruchetP. (2000). Implicit learning in children is not related to age: Evidence from drawing behavior.Child Development71, 1223–1240.
28.
VinterA.PerruchetP. (2002). Implicit motor learning through observational training in adults and children.Memory & Cognition30, 256–261.
29.
WalterM.-A. (2007). Repetition avoidance in human language, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
30.
WiegersmaS. (1982). A control theory of sequential response production.Psychological Research44, 175–188.
