Implicit Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Its Relationship With Reading in Childhood.

Implicit statistical learning (ISL) describes our ability to tacitly pick up regularities from our environment therefore, shaping our behavior. A broad understanding of ISL incorporates a great range of possible computations, which render it highly relevant to reading. In the light of this hypothesized relationship, ISL performance was explored in young (M = 8.

Implicit learning and reading: insights from typical children and children with developmental dyslexia using the artificial grammar learning (AGL) paradigm.

We examined implicit learning in school-aged children with and without developmental dyslexia based on the proposal that implicit learning plays a significant role in mastering fluent reading. We ran two experiments with 16 typically developing children (9 to 11-years-old) and 16 age-matched children with developmental dyslexia using the artificial grammar learning (AGL) paradigm. In Experiment 1 (non-transfer task), children were trained on stimuli that followed patterns (rules) unknown to them.

Do children with developmental dyslexia have impairments in implicit learning?

We explored implicit learning in a group of typically developing and developmental dyslexic primary school children (9-12 y) using a modified artificial grammar learning task. Performance was calculated using two measures of performance: a perfect free recall (PFR) score and a grammaticality judgment score. Both groups of children required the same amount of exposure to memorize the items (i.

Artificial grammar learning in primary school children with and without developmental dyslexia.

This paper explores implicit learning in typically developing and primary school children (9-12 years old) with developmental dyslexia using an artificial grammar learning (AGL) task. Two experiments were conducted, which differed in time of presentation and nature of the instructional set (experiment 1--implicit instructions vs experiment 2--explicit instructions). Repeated measures analysis of variance (group x grammaticality x chunk strength) showed a group effect only in experiment 1 (implicit instructions), with only the typically developing children showing evidence of AGL.