Stimulus dependence and cross-modal interference in sequence learning

A central issue in sequence learning is whether learning operates on stimulus-independent abstract elements, or whether surface features are integrated, resulting in stimulus-dependent learning. Using the serial reaction-time (SRT) task, we test whether a previously presented sequence is transferrable from one domain to another. Contrary to previous artificial grammar learning studies, there is mapping between pre- and posttransfer stimuli, but contrary to previous SRT studies mapping is not obvious. In the pre-transfer training phase, participants face a dot-counting task in which the location of the dots follows a predefined sequence. In the test phase, participants face an auditory SRT task in which the spatial organization of the response locations is either the same as spatial sequence in the training phase, or not. Sequence learning is compared to two control conditions: one with a non-sequential random-dot counting in the training phase, and one with no training phase. Results show that sequential training proactively interferes with later sequence learning, regardless of whether the sequence is the same or different in the two phases. Results argue for the existence of a general sequence processor with limited capacity, and that sequence structures and sequenced elements are integrated into a single sequential representation.

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

[2]  R. Gómez,et al.  Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[3]  Hillary D. Schwarb,et al.  Generalized lessons about sequence learning from the study of the serial reaction time task , 2012, Advances in cognitive psychology.

[4]  D Broadbent,et al.  Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[5]  G. Remillard Pure perceptual-based sequence learning. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[6]  D. Shanks,et al.  Effects of a secondary task on "implicit" sequence learning: learning or performance? , 2002, Psychological research.

[7]  Axel Buchner,et al.  Learning versus behavioral expression of the learned: The effects of a secondary tone-counting task on implicit learning in the serial reaction task , 1998 .

[8]  L R Squire,et al.  Dissociable properties of memory systems: differences in the flexibility of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge. , 1996, Behavioral neuroscience.

[9]  Christopher M. Conway,et al.  Neurocognitive mechanisms of statistical-sequential learning: what do event-related potentials tell us? , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[10]  R. Gómez,et al.  Transfer and Complexity in Artificial Grammar Learning , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Jacquelyne J. Rivera,et al.  Music perception and octave generalization in rhesus monkeys. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[12]  R. Tunney,et al.  Two modes of transfer in artificial grammar learning. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

[14]  J. H. Howard,et al.  Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns. , 1997, Psychology and aging.

[15]  R. Gómez,et al.  Artificial grammar learning by 1-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge , 1999, Cognition.

[16]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Infant Rule Learning Facilitated by Speech , 2007, Psychological science.

[17]  M. Nissen,et al.  Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Transfer of learning: rule acquisition or statistical learning? , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  Daniel B. Willingham,et al.  Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[20]  Christopher M. Conway,et al.  Using dual-task methodology to dissociate automatic from nonautomatic processes involved in artificial grammar learning. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  L. Squire,et al.  Artificial grammar learning depends on implicit acquisition of both abstract and exemplar-specific information. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  Eric Soetens,et al.  Effector-dependent and response location learning of probabilistic sequences in serial reaction time tasks , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[23]  D. Howard,et al.  Serial pattern learning by event observation. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  Does Grammar Start Where Statistics Stop? , 2002, Science.

[25]  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.

[26]  Z. Dienes,et al.  Modality Independence of Implicitly Learned Grammatical Knowledge , 2004 .

[27]  Z. Dienes,et al.  Rule learning by seven-month-old infants and neural networks , 1999 .

[28]  L. Squire,et al.  The structure and organization of memory. , 1993, Annual review of psychology.

[29]  Daniel B. Willingham,et al.  Patterns of interference in sequence learning and prism adaptation inconsistent with the consolidation hypothesis. , 2002, Learning & memory.

[30]  Pierre Perruchet,et al.  Synthetic Grammar Learning : Implicit Rule Abstraction or Explicit Fragmentary Knowledge ? Pierre Perruchet and Chantal Pacteau , 1990 .

[31]  R. Peereman,et al.  Learning Nonadjacent Dependencies: No Need for Algebraic-like Computations Is It Possible to Learn the Relation between 2 Nonadjacent Events? , 2004 .

[32]  Daniel M. Weary,et al.  Relative frequency parameters and song recognition in black-capped chickadees , 1992 .

[33]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults , 1999, Cognition.

[34]  Karsten Steinhauer,et al.  Brain signatures of artificial language processing: Evidence challenging the critical period hypothesis , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  Katsumi Watanabe,et al.  Implicit Transfer of Reversed Temporal Structure in Visuomotor Sequence Learning , 2014, Cogn. Sci..

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

[37]  M Negishi,et al.  Do infants learn grammar with algebra or statistics? , 1999, Science.

[38]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  The problem of reversals in assessing implicit sequence learning with serial reaction time tasks , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[39]  Paul J. Reber,et al.  Neural Correlates of Artificial Grammar Learning , 2002, NeuroImage.

[40]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Statistical Learning in Linguistic and Nonlinguistic Domains , 2013 .

[41]  Maryellen C MacDonald,et al.  Neuroscience. Does grammar start where statistics stop? , 2002, Science.

[42]  Ferenc Kemény,et al.  Perceptual Effect on Motor Learning in the Serial Reaction-Time Task , 2011, The Journal of general psychology.

[43]  David A. Caulton,et al.  On the Modularity of Sequence Representation , 1995 .

[44]  E. Robertson The Serial Reaction Time Task: Implicit Motor Skill Learning? , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[45]  Z. Dienes,et al.  On the modality independence of implicitly learned grammatical knowledge , 1995 .

[46]  S. H. Hulse,et al.  Relative pitch perception in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris): further evidence for an elusive phenomenon. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[47]  The transfer effect in artificial grammar learning: Reappraising the evidence on the transfer of sequential dependencies. , 1999 .

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

[49]  John R. Vokey,et al.  Salience of Item Knowledge in Learning Artificial Grammars , 1992 .

[50]  Aniruddh D. Patel,et al.  Stimulus-dependent flexibility in non-human auditory pitch processing , 2012, Cognition.

[51]  Ferenc Kemény,et al.  Stimulus dependence in probabilistic category learning. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[52]  N. Chater,et al.  Transfer in artificial grammar learning : A reevaluation , 1996 .

[53]  H. Pashler,et al.  Is the mind inherently forward looking? Comparing prediction and retrodiction , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[54]  J. R. Vokey,et al.  Abstract analogies and positive transfer in artificial grammar learning. , 2005, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[55]  B. Scholl,et al.  Flexible visual statistical learning: transfer across space and time. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[56]  P. Eimas Segmental and syllabic representations in the perception of speech by young infants. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[57]  J. Pierrehumbert Phonetic Diversity, Statistical Learning, and Acquisition of Phonology , 2003, Language and speech.

[58]  James H. Howard,et al.  Intermanual transfer of procedural learning after extended practice of probabilistic sequences , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[59]  R. Gómez,et al.  Twelve-Month-Old Infants Benefit From Prior Experience in Statistical Learning , 2008, Psychological science.

[60]  J. Saffran,et al.  Dog is a dog is a dog: Infant rule learning is not specific to language , 2007, Cognition.

[61]  R. Schvaneveldt,et al.  The basis of transfer in artificial grammar learning , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[62]  A. Reber Implicit learning of artificial grammars , 1967 .

[63]  Axel Cleeremans,et al.  Can sequence learning be implicit? New evidence with the process dissociation procedure , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[64]  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.

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

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

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