CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Brain Networks of Explicit and Implicit Learning

Yang, Jing, Li, Ping·2012·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042993PMC PMC3432050
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0042993

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Explicit learners engage more of a network that relies on the insula as a relay station, whereas implicit learners evoke a more direct frontalstriatal network in language learning and processing.

    “Yang & Li 2012) which found that the explicit learners engaged more of a network that relies on the insula as a relay station, whereas their implicit counterparts evoked a more direct frontalstriatal network in language learning and processing.”

    From Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow (2017) · cites this paper as Yang & Li 2012

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. [1]Ullman MT, Corkin S, Coppola M, Hickok G, Growdon JH, et al (1997) A neural dissociation within language: evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. J Cognitive Neurosci 9: 266– 276. 23962016
  2. [2]Cohen NJ, Eichenbaum H, Deacedo BS, Corkin S (1985) Different memory systems underlying acquisition of procedural and declarative knowledge. Ann N Y Acad Sci 444: 54– 71. 3860122
  3. [3]Eichenbaum H (1999) Conscious awareness, memory and the hippocampus. Nat Neurosci 2: 775– 776. 10461210
  4. [4]Heindel WC, Salmon DP, Shults CW, Walicke PA, Butters N (1989) Neuropsychological evidence for multiple implicit memory systems: a comparison of Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s, and Parkinson’s disease patients. J Neurosci 9: 582– 587. 2521896 PMC6569801
  5. [5]Knowlton BJ (2002) The role of the basal ganglia in learning and memory. In: Squire LR, Schacter DL, editors. Neuropsychology of memory. New York: Guilford Press. 143–153.
  6. [6]Reber PJ, Squire LR (1994) Parallel brain systems for learning with and without awareness. Learn Mem 1: 217– 229. 10467599
  7. [7]Poldrack RA, Clark J, Pare-Blagoev, Shohamy EJ, Moyano D, et al (2001) Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature 414: 546– 550. 11734855
  8. [10]Forkstam C, Petersson KM (2005) Towards an explicit account of implicit learning. Curr Opin Neurol 18: 435– 441. 16003121
  9. [12]Sun R, Slusarz P, Terry C (2005) The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning: a dual-process approach. Psychol Rev 112: 159– 192. 15631592
  10. [13]Destrebecqz A, Peigneux P, Laureys S, Degueldre C, Fiore GD, et al (2005) The neural correlates of implicit and explicit sequence learning: interacting networks revealed by the process dissociation procedure. Learn Mem 12: 480– 490. 16166397 PMC1240060
  11. [14]Pascual-Leone A, Grafman J, Hallett M (1994) Modulation of cortical motor output maps during development of implicit and explicit knowledge. Science 263: 1287– 1289. 8122113
  12. [17]Poldrack R (2011) The future of fMRI in cognitive neuroscience. Neuroimage 62: 1216– 1220. 21856431 PMC4131441
  13. [18]Sporns O (2010) Networks of the Brain. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 412 p.
  14. [20]Friston KJ, Harrison L, Penny W (2003) Dynamic causal modeling. Neuroimage 19: 1273– 1302. 12948688
  15. [21]Gates KM, Molenaar P, Hillary FG, Ram N, Rovine MJ (2010) Automatic search for fMRI connectivity mapping: An alternative to Granger causality testing using formal equivalences among SEM path modeling, VAR, and unified SEM. Neuroimage 50: 1118– 1125. 20060050
  16. [22]Hillary FG, Medaglia JD, Gates K, Molenaar P, Slocomb J, et al (2011) Examing working memory task acquisition in a disrupted neural network. Brain 134: 1555– 1570. 21571783
  17. [25]Baddeley AD, Gathercole S, Papagno C (1998) The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychol Rev 105: 158– 173. 9450375
  18. [29]Reber AS, Walkenfeld FF, Henstad R (1991) Implicit and explicit learning: individual differences and IQ. J Exp Psychol Learn 17: 888– 896. 1834770
  19. [30]Tagarelli K, Borges-Mota M, Rebuschat P (2011) The role of working memory in implicit and explicit language learning. In: Carlson L, Hőlscher C, Shiple TF, editors. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. 2061–2066.
  20. [34]Friederici AD, Steinhauer K, Pfeifer E (2002) Brain signatures of second language acquisition: evidence challenging the critical period. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99: 529– 534. 11773629 PMC117594
  21. [35]Christiansen MH, Conway CM, Onnis L (2012) Similar neural correlates for language and sequential learning: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Lang Cognitive Proc 27: 231– 256. PMC3652480 23678205
  22. [36]Lieberman MD, Chang GY, Chiao J, Bookheimer SY, Knowlton BJ (2004) An event-related fMRI study of artificial grammar learning in a balanced chunk strength design. J Cognitive Neurosci 16: 427– 438. 15072678
  23. [37]Aizenstein HJ, Stenger VA, Cochran J, Clark K, Johnson M, et al (2004) Regional brain activation during concurrent implicit and explicit sequence learning. Cereb Cortex 14: 199– 208. 14704217
  24. [38]Poldrack RA, Rodriguez P (2003) Sequence Learning: What’s the Hippocampus to Do? Neuron 37: 891– 893. 12670418
  25. [40]Chiarello C, Hoyer WJ (1988) Adult age differences in implicit and explicit memory: time course and encoding effects. Psychol Aging 3: 358– 366. 3268280
  26. [41]Dennis NA, Cabeza R (2011) Age-related dedifferentiation of learning systems: an fMRI study of implicit and explicit learning. Neurobiol Aging 32: 2318.e17– 2318.e30. PMC2923680 20471139
  27. [42]Isingrini M, Vazou F, Leroy P (1995) Dissociation of implicit and explicit memory tests: effect of age and divided attention on category exemplar generation and cued recall. Mem Cognition 23: 462– 467. 7666759
  28. [43]Dienes Z, Broadbent D, Berry D (1991) Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning. J Exp Psychol Learn 17: 875– 887. 1834769
  29. [44]Morgan-Short K, Finger I, Grey S, Ullman MT (2012) Second language processing shows increased native-like neural responses after months of no exposure. Plos One 7: e32974 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032974. 22470434 PMC3314650 · DOI
  30. [45]Li P, Tokowicz N (2012) The psycholinguistics of second language acquisition. In: Robinson, editor. Routlege encyclopedia of second language acquisition. New York: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
  31. [46]Rauch S, Whalen PJ, Savage CR, Curran T, Kendrick A, et al (1997) Striatal recruitment during an implicit sequence learning task as measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 5: 124– 132. 10096417
  32. [47]Reiss JP, Campbell DW, Leslie WD, Paulus MP, Stroman PW, et al (2005) The role of the striatum in implicit learning: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroreport 16: 1291– 1295. 16056127
  33. [48]Seger CA, Cincotta CM (2005) The role of the caudate nucleus in human classification learning. J Neurosci 25: 2941– 2951. 15772354 PMC6725143
  34. [49]Snyder PJ, Harris LJ (1993) Handedness, sex, and familial sinistrality effects on spatial tasks. Cortex 29: 115– 134. 8472549
  35. [51]Dunn DM, Dunn LM (2007) Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition, manual. Minneapolis: NCS Pearson, Inc.
  36. [53]Bates E, D’amico S, Jacobsen T, Székely A, Devescovi A, et al (2003) Timed picture naming in seven languages. Psychon B Rev 10: 344– 380. PMC3392189 12921412
  37. [55]Luk G, Anderson JAE, Craik FIM, Grady C, Bialystok E (2010) Distinct neural correlates for two types of inhibition in bilinguals: Response inhibition versus interference suppression. Brain Cognition 74: 347– 357. 20965635
  38. [56]Prior A, Macwhinney B (2010) A bilingual advantage in task switching. Biling –Lang Cogn. 13: 253– 262. PMC9724810 36479004
  39. [58]Brown TA (2006) Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.475 p.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yang, J., & Li, P.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2012-08-31
Volume
7
Issue
8
Pages
e42993
ISSN
1932-6203
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0042993
PMC
PMC3432050
Cited by
111
References
6
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (unspecified)

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