ArticleCurrent biology : CB2017
Disruption of Perceptual Learning by a Brief Practice Break.
Article in Current biology : CB, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A transient memory lapse in humans 1-3 h after training.NPJ science of learning · 2024Article
- Modest sex differences in the test of basic auditory capabilities (TBAC).Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Priority coding in the visual system.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2022Review
- Non-sensory Influences on Auditory Learning and Plasticity.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2022Review
- Audiovisual training rapidly reduces potentially hazardous perceptual errors caused by earplugs.Hearing research · 2022Article
- Change deafness can be reduced, but not eliminated, using brief training interventions.Psychological research · 2021Article
- A comprehensive quality assessment framework for scientific events.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Tactile angle discriminability improvement: roles of training time intervals and different types of training tasks.Journal of neurophysiology · 2019Article
- Evidence that anterograde learning interference depends on the stage of learning of the interferer: blocked versus interleaved training.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Some forms of associative learning require only a single experience to create a lasting memory [1, 2]. In contrast, perceptual learning often requires extensive practice within a day for performance to improve across days [3, 4]. This suggests that the requisite practice for durable perceptual learning is integrated throughout each day. If the total amount of daily practice is the only important variable, then a practice break within a day should not disrupt across-day improvement. To test this idea, we trained human listeners on an auditory frequency-discrimination task over multiple days and compared the performance of those who engaged in a single continuous practice session each day [4] with those who were given a 30-min break halfway through each practice session. Continuous practice yielded significant perceptual learning [4]. In contrast, practice with a rest break led to no improvement, indicating that the integration process had decayed within 30 min. In a separate experiment, a 30-min practice break also disrupted durable learning on a non-native phonetic classification task. These results suggest that practice trials are integrated up to a learning threshold within a transient memory store before they are sent en masse into a memory that lasts across days. Thus, the oft cited benefits of distributed over massed training [5, 6] may arise from different mechanisms depending on whether the breaks occur before or after a learning threshold has been reached. Trial integration could serve as an early gatekeeper to plasticity, helping to ensure that longer-lasting changes are only made when deemed worthwhile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.