Statistical Learning Is Constrained to Less Abstract Patterns in Complex Sensory Input (but not the Least)

The influence of statistical information on behavior (either through learning or adaptation) is quickly becoming foundational to many domains of cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience, from language comprehension to visual development. We investigate a central problem impacting these diverse fields: when encountering input with rich statistical information, are there any constraints on learning? This paper examines learning outcomes when adult learners are given statistical information across multiple levels of abstraction simultaneously: from abstract, semantic categories of everyday objects to individual viewpoints on these objects. After revealing statistical learning of abstract, semantic categories with scrambled individual exemplars (Exp. 1), participants viewed pictures where the categories as well as the individual objects predicted picture order (e.g., bird1—dog1, bird2—dog2). Our findings suggest that participants preferentially encode the relationships between the individual objects, even in the presence of statistical regularities linking semantic categories (Exps. 2 and 3). In a final experiment we investigate whether learners are biased towards learning object-level regularities or simply construct the most detailed model given the data (and therefore best able to predict the specifics of the upcoming stimulus) by investigating whether participants preferentially learn from the statistical regularities linking individual snapshots of objects or the relationship between the objects themselves (e.g., bird_picture1— dog_picture1, bird_picture2—dog_picture2). We find that participants fail to learn the relationships between individual snapshots, suggesting a bias towards object-level statistical regularities as opposed to merely constructing the most complete model of the input. This work moves beyond the previous existence proofs that statistical learning is possible at both very high and very low levels of abstraction (categories vs. individual objects) and suggests that, at least with the current categories and type of learner, there are biases to pick up on statistical regularities between individual objects even when robust statistical information is present at other levels of abstraction. These findings speak directly to emerging theories about how systems supporting statistical learning and prediction operate in our structure-rich environments. Moreover, the theoretical implications of the current work across multiple domains of study is already clear: statistical learning cannot be assumed to be unconstrained even if statistical learning has previously been established at a given level of abstraction when that information is presented in isolation.

[1]  Yuhong V Jiang,et al.  Changing viewer perspectives reveals constraints to implicit visual statistical learning. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[2]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  fMRI Activity Patterns in Human LOC Carry Information about Object Exemplars within Category , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  From shared contexts to syntactic categories: The role of distributional information in learning linguistic form-classes , 2013, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  Dave F. Kleinschmidt,et al.  Robust speech perception: recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel. , 2015, Psychological review.

[6]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Pictures and names: Making the connection , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Graded motor responses in the time course of categorizing atypical exemplars , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[8]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Visual statistical learning in infancy: evidence for a domain general learning mechanism , 2002, Cognition.

[9]  Aude Oliva,et al.  Visual long-term memory has a massive storage capacity for object details , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Elisabeth A. Karuza,et al.  On-line Measures of Prediction in a Self-Paced Statistical Learning Task , 2014, CogSci.

[11]  Jarrod A. Lewis-Peacock,et al.  Pruning of memories by context-based prediction error , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  E. Newport,et al.  Science Current Directions in Psychological Statistical Learning : from Acquiring Specific Items to Forming General Rules on Behalf Of: Association for Psychological Science , 2022 .

[13]  R. Aslin,et al.  Statistical learning in a serial reaction time task: access to separable statistical cues by individual learners. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[14]  R N Aslin,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996, Science.

[15]  Peter M. Duppenthaler Maturational Constraints on Language Learning , 1990 .

[16]  Peter M. Vishton,et al.  Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. , 1999, Science.

[17]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Statistical Learning Within and Between Modalities Pitting Abstract Against Stimulus-Specific Representations , 2022 .

[18]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Domain generality versus modality specificity: the paradox of statistical learning , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  S. Edelman,et al.  Learn locally, act globally: Learning language from variation set cues , 2008, Cognition.

[20]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  The neural correlates of statistical learning in a word segmentation task: An fMRI study , 2013, Brain and Language.

[21]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Three-dimensional object recognition is viewpoint dependent , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[22]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  Dale Purves,et al.  Understanding vision in wholly empirical terms , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  Statistical learning of adjacent and nonadjacent dependencies among nonlinguistic sounds , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Statistical Learning Using Real-World Scenes Extracting Categorical Regularities Without Conscious Intent , 2022 .

[26]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Modality-constrained statistical learning of tactile, visual, and auditory sequences. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  S. Kastner,et al.  Two hierarchically organized neural systems for object information in human visual cortex , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[28]  Elisabeth A. Karuza,et al.  Combining fMRI and behavioral measures to examine the process of human learning , 2014, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[29]  R. Dolan,et al.  Fmri activity patterns in human loc carry information about object exemplars within category , 2008 .

[30]  R. Rescorla Behavioral studies of Pavlovian conditioning. , 1988, Annual review of neuroscience.

[31]  D. Purves,et al.  How biological vision succeeds in the physical world , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  A. Clark Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[33]  Alex B. Fine,et al.  Evidence for Implicit Learning in Syntactic Comprehension , 2013, Cogn. Sci..

[34]  P. Perruchet,et al.  Implicit learning and statistical learning: one phenomenon, two approaches , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[35]  Lin-Juan Cong,et al.  Perceptual learning of contrast discrimination under roving: the role of semantic sequence in stimulus tagging. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[36]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Timing is everything: Changes in presentation rate have opposite effects on auditory and visual implicit statistical learning , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  U. Mayr,et al.  Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[38]  Jared G. Smith,et al.  The implicit sequence learning deficit in patients with Parkinson's disease: A matter of impaired sequence integration? , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[39]  R. Aslin,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article UNSUPERVISED STATISTICAL LEARNING OF HIGHER-ORDER SPATIAL STRUCTURES FROM VISUAL SCENES , 2022 .

[40]  Jenny R Saffran,et al.  Words in a sea of sounds: the output of infant statistical learning , 2001, Cognition.

[41]  Lauren L. Emberson,et al.  Learning to Sample: Eye Tracking and fMRI Indices of Changes in Object Perception , 2012, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[42]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  Neural Evidence of Statistical Learning: Efficient Detection of Visual Regularities Without Awareness , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[43]  J. Elman Learning and development in neural networks: the importance of starting small , 1993, Cognition.

[44]  Peter Dayan,et al.  A Neural Substrate of Prediction and Reward , 1997, Science.

[45]  S. Keele,et al.  The cognitive and neural architecture of sequence representation. , 2003, Psychological review.

[46]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  Statistical learning of new visual feature combinations by infants , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  Michael J. Constantino,et al.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations , 2008 .

[48]  Stephane Champely,et al.  Basic Functions for Power Analysis , 2015 .

[49]  Alexa R. Romberg,et al.  Statistical learning and language acquisition. , 2010, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[50]  J. Saffran Constraints on Statistical Language Learning , 2002 .

[51]  Jim M. Monti,et al.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[52]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  Beyond Word Segmentation , 2013 .

[53]  Lauren L. Emberson,et al.  Is statistical learning constrained by lower level perceptual organization? , 2013, Cognition.

[54]  T. Harkany,et al.  Mechanisms of ß-Amyloid Neurotoxicity: Perspectives of Pharmacotherapy , 2000, Reviews in the neurosciences.

[55]  G. Murphy,et al.  The Big Book of Concepts , 2002 .

[56]  Gary Lupyan,et al.  Cognitive Penetrability of Perception in the Age of Prediction: Predictive Systems are Penetrable Systems , 2015 .

[57]  I Koch,et al.  Patterns, chunks, and hierarchies in serial reaction-time tasks , 2000, Psychological research.

[58]  R. Henson,et al.  Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[59]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Implicit Perceptual Anticipation Triggered by Statistical Learning , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[60]  Dare A. Baldwin,et al.  Segmenting dynamic human action via statistical structure , 2008, Cognition.