Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns.
Abstract
3 experiments examined serial pattern learning in younger and older adults. Unlike the usual repeating pattern, the sequences alternated between events from a repeating pattern and those determined randomly. The results indicated that no one was able to describe the regularity, but with practice every individual in all 3 age groups (including old old) became faster, more accurate, or both, on pattern trials than on random trials. Although this indicates that adults of all ages are able to learn second-order statistical dependencies in a sequence, age-related deficits were obtained in the magnitude of pattern learning. There were also age differences in what was learned, with only younger people revealing sensitivity to higher order statistical dependencies in the sequence. In addition, whereas younger people revealed evidence of their pattern learning in a subsequent conceptually driven production test, young-old and old-old people did not.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
ASRT examines implicit (or procedural) sequence learning.
“ASRT examines one's ability for implicit (or procedural) sequence learning (Howard & Howard, 1997).”
From Testing the three-stage model of second language skill acquisition (2025) · cites this paper as Howard & Howard, 1997
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Are There Age-Related Differences in the Ability to Learn Configural Responses?
Clark, R., Freedberg, M., Hazeltine, E., & Voss, M. W. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137260 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Testing the three-stage model of second language skill acquisition
Maie, R., & Godfroid, A. (2025) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226312500021x · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Alternating serial reaction time task ASRT examines one ’ s ability for implicit (or procedural) sequence learning (Howard & Howard, 1997).”
- Authors
- Howard, J. H., & Howard, D. V.
- Affiliations
- Catholic University of America (US)
- Venue
- Psychology and Aging
- Published
- 1997
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 634-656
- ISSN
- 0882-7974 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1498
- OpenAlex
- W2025539352
- Cited by
- 390
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 5.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology and Aging (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r37ag002751-16)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- implicit learning, serial pattern learning, age differences, older adults, production testing, cognitive aging
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Analysis of Variance, Concept Formation, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Mathematics, Probability Learning, Serial Learning, Stochastic Processes, Unconscious, Psychology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review