Please Scroll down for Article European Journal of Cognitive Psychology Seeing and Hearing in Space and Time: Effects of Modality and Presentation Rate on Implicit Statistical Learning

Across a wide range of tasks, vision appears to process input best when it is spatially rather than temporally distributed, whereas audition is the opposite. Here we explored whether such modality constraints also affect implicit statistical learning in an artificial grammar learning task. Participants were exposed to statistically governed input sequences and then tested on their ability to classify novel items. We explored three types of presentation formats—visual input distributed spatially, visual input distributed temporally, auditory input distributed temporally—and two rates of presentation: moderate (4 elements/second) and fast (8 elements/second). Overall, learning abilities were best for visual-spatial and auditory input. Additionally, at the faster presentation rate, performance declined only for the visual-temporal condition. Finally, auditory learning was mediated by increased sensitivity to the endings of input sequences, whereas vision was most sensitive to the beginnings of sequences. These results suggest that statistical learning for sequential and spatial patterns proceeds differently across the visual and auditory modalities.

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

[2]  F. Darley,et al.  Brain Mechanisms Underlying Speech and Language , 1967 .

[3]  A. Reber Transfer of syntactic structure in synthetic languages. , 1969 .

[4]  J. Gibson,et al.  The Senses Considered As Perceptual Systems , 1967 .

[5]  S Handel,et al.  Using Several Modalities to Perceive one Temporal Pattern , 1969, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  F A Geldard,et al.  Vision, audition, and beyond. , 1970, Contributions to sensory physiology.

[7]  D. Freides,et al.  Human information processing and sensory modality: cross-modal functions, information complexity, memory, and deficit. , 1974, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  L. Marks The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations Among the Modalities , 1978 .

[9]  N. O’connor,et al.  Seeing and hearing and space and time , 1978 .

[10]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Spatial and temporal processing in the auditory and visual modalities , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[11]  A. Glenberg,et al.  A temporal distinctiveness theory of recency and modality effects. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[12]  S Handel Space is to time as vision is to audition: seductive but misleading. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Michael Kubovy,et al.  Should We Resist the Seductiveness of the Space:Time::Vision:Audition Analogy? , 1988 .

[14]  C. Penney Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[15]  R. Mathews,et al.  Role of Implicit and Explicit Processes in Learning From Examples: A Synergistic Effect , 1989 .

[16]  John R. Vokey,et al.  Abstract analogies and abstracted grammars: Comments on Reber (1989) and Mathews et al. (1989). , 1991 .

[17]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Learning the structure of event sequences. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  D. Mcnicol,et al.  Modality-Specific Differences in the Processing of Spatially, Temporally, and Spatiotemporally Distributed Information , 1994, Perception.

[19]  P. Frensch,et al.  Effects of presentation rate and individual differences in short-term memory capacity on an indirect measure of serial learning , 1994, Memory & cognition.

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

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

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

[23]  E. Newport,et al.  WORD SEGMENTATION : THE ROLE OF DISTRIBUTIONAL CUES , 1996 .

[24]  Thierry Meulemans,et al.  Associative chunk strength in artificial grammar learning , 1997 .

[25]  A. Glenberg,et al.  What memory is for: Creating meaning in the service of action , 1997, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

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

[27]  T Johnstone,et al.  Abstraction Processes in Artificial Grammar Learning , 1997, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[28]  John Duncan,et al.  Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities , 1997, Nature.

[29]  P. Ashworth,et al.  Handbook of Implicit Learning , 1998 .

[30]  Axel Cleeremans,et al.  Implicit learning: news from the front , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[32]  Richard J. Tunney,et al.  The transfer effect in artificial grammar learning: Reappraising the evidence on the transfer of sequential dependencies. , 1999 .

[33]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Whither structured representation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[34]  Todd M. Bailey,et al.  The role of similarity in artificial grammar learning. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  G. Logan,et al.  Modality differences in short-term memory for rhythms , 2000, Memory & cognition.

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

[37]  Axel Cleeremans,et al.  Implicit learning out of the lab: the case of orthographic regularities. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[38]  Margaret Wilson The case for sensorimotor coding in working memory , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[39]  T. Stoffregen,et al.  On specification and the senses , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[40]  Mathew E. Diamond,et al.  The Cortical Distribution of Sensory Memories , 2001, Neuron.

[41]  M. Kubovy,et al.  Auditory and visual objects , 2001, Cognition.

[42]  S. Shamma On the role of space and time in auditory processing , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[43]  Gerry T M Altmann,et al.  Statistical learning in infants , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  C. Philip Beaman,et al.  Inverting the modality effect in serial recall , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[46]  Bruno H Repp,et al.  Auditory dominance in temporal processing: new evidence from synchronization with simultaneous visual and auditory sequences. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  M. Chun,et al.  Perceptual constraints on implicit learning of spatial context , 2002 .

[48]  Barbara J Knowlton,et al.  Visual feature learning in artificial grammar classification. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[49]  D. Buonomano,et al.  The neural basis of temporal processing. , 2004, Annual review of neuroscience.

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

[51]  R. Mathews,et al.  Role of Implicit and Explicit Processes in Learning From Examples : A Synergistic Effect , 2004 .

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

[53]  B. Scholl,et al.  The Automaticity of Visual Statistical Learning Statistical Learning , 2005 .

[54]  David C. Rubin,et al.  The Basic-Systems Model of Episodic Memory , 2006, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[55]  N. Chater,et al.  Does stimulus appearance affect learning? , 2006, The American journal of psychology.

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

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

[58]  A. Ghazanfar,et al.  Is neocortex essentially multisensory? , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[59]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Spatial Constraints on Visual Statistical Learning of Multi-Element Scenes , 2007 .

[60]  Christopher M. Conway,et al.  Contribution of implicit sequence learning to spoken language processing: some preliminary findings with hearing adults. , 2007, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.