The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Implicit Statistical Learning: A Tale of Two Literatures
Abstract
Implicit learning and statistical learning are two contemporary approaches to the long‐standing question in psychology and cognitive science of how organisms pick up on patterned regularities in their environment. Although both approaches focus on the learner's ability to use distributional properties to discover patterns in the input, the relevant research has largely been published in separate literatures and with surprisingly little cross‐pollination between them. This has resulted in apparently opposing perspectives on the computations involved in learning, pitting chunk‐based learning against probabilistic learning. In this paper, I trace the nearly century‐long historical pedigree of the two approaches to learning and argue for their integration under the heading of “implicit statistical learning.” Building on basic insights from the memory literature, I sketch a framework for statistically based chunking that aims to provide a unified basis for understanding implicit statistical learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“By contrast, LLAMA D is an accuracy measure which assesses learning offline (Christiansen, 2019).”
From Aptitude for Explicit and Implicit Learning (2024) · cites this paper as Christiansen, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“The SRT task is an RT measure that gauges the process of on-task learning (i.e., it is a processing-based measure, Christiansen, 2019).”
From Aptitude for Explicit and Implicit Learning (2024) · cites this paper as Christiansen, 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60452-1 · Cited by 9,860
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779
Word Segmentation: The Role of Distributional Cues
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (1996) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0032 · Cited by 1,405
Nonword repetition and child language impairment
Dollaghan, C., & Campbell, T. F. (1998) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/jslhr.4105.1136 · Cited by 1,006
Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.262 · Cited by 821
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 62
- 10.1098/rstb.2016.0047 · DOI
- 10.1111/tops.12271 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.004 · DOI
- 10.1080/02724980143000307 · DOI
- 10.1080/14640748408402156 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0023763 · DOI
- 10.1111/tops.12274 · DOI
- 10.7551/mitpress/10406.001.0001 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0140525X1500031X · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03201243 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.009 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.31.1.24 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01801.x · DOI
- 10.1080/09541440802097951 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0168532 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0278-7393.6.3.319 · DOI
- 10.1080/17470218.2010.538972 · DOI
- Esper E. A., 1925, A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial linguistic material
- 10.1080/00221309.1933.9713192 · DOI
- 10.2307/411408 · DOI
- Fischer S., 1922, Über das Entstehen und Verstehen von Namen, mit einem Beitrage zur Lehre von den transkortikalen Aphasien, Archiv für die Gesamte Psychologie, 43, 32
- 10.1027/1618-3169/a000295 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2014.12.010 · DOI
- Frost R. L. A., 2016, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 81
- 10.1177/0956797612472207 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/23273798.2015.1047459 · DOI
- Isbilen E. S., 2017, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 564
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.009 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03196873 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0707835105 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00004-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0278-7393.20.1.79 · DOI
- Levelt W., 2013, A history of psycholinguistics: The pre‐Chomskyan era
- McCauley S. M., 2011, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1619
- 10.1075/ml.9.3.03mcc · DOI
- McCauley S. M., 2015, Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
- McCauley S. M., 2017, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2681
- 10.1037/h0031564 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0044933 · DOI
- Miller G. A., 1967, The psychology of communication: Seven essays, 125
- 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01072.x · DOI
- 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90017-X · DOI
- 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90002-8 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.011 · DOI
- 10.1016/B978-012370509-9.00149-2 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2006.03.006 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmla.1998.2576 · DOI
- 10.1080/016909697386682 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2011.04.001 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80149-X · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03196682 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.274.5294.1926 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1098/rstb.2016.0059 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jml.2015.02.001 · DOI
- Slone L., 2015, Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2218
- Studdert‐Kennedy M., 1986, Behavioral and social science: Fifty years of discovery, 208
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.006 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.552 · DOI
- 10.1111/lang.12137 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.08.002 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rubio-Fernandez, P. (2021) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-021-00818-6 · Cited by 16
Aptitude for Explicit and Implicit Learning
Pavlekovic, R., & Roehr-Brackin, K. (2024) · Journal of the European Second Language Association · doi:10.22599/jesla.117 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Christiansen, M. H.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychology Cornell University
- Venue
- Topics in Cognitive Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-04-06
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 468-481
- ISSN
- 1756-8757
- 1756-8765
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 6
- Language
- en
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