ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019
Concurrent Learning of Adjacent and Nonadjacent Dependencies in Visuo-Spatial and Visuo-Verbal Sequences.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning Type I and Type II regularities between multiple sequentially presented stimulus categories.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Incidental auditory category learning and visuomotor sequence learning do not compete for cognitive resources.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- How does the brain learn environmental structure? Ten core principles for understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms of statistical learning.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2020Review
- Distinct neural networks for detecting violations of adjacent versus nonadjacent sequential dependencies: An fMRI study.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2020Article
- Tracking the implicit acquisition of nonadjacent transitional probabilities by ERPs.Memory & cognition · 2019Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Both adjacent and non-adjacent dependencies (AD and NAD) are present in natural language and other domains, yet the learning of non-adjacent sequential dependencies generally only occurs under favorable circumstances. It is currently unknown to what extent adults can learn AD and NAD, presented concurrently in spatial and verbal sequences during a single session, and whether a second session improves performance. In addition, the relationship between AD and NAD learning and other theoretically related cognitive and language processes has not yet been fully established. In this study, participants reproduced two types of sequences generated from an artificial grammar: visuo-spatial sequences with stimuli presented in four spatial locations, and visuo-verbal sequences with printed syllables. Participants were tested for incidental learning by reproducing novel sequences, half consistent with the grammar and half containing violations of either AD or NAD. The procedure was repeated on a second day. Results showed that both AD and NAD were learned in both visuo-spatial and visuo-verbal tasks, although AD learning was better than NAD and learning of NAD decreased over time. Furthermore, NAD learning for both spatial and verbal tasks was positively correlated with a language measure, whereas AD learning for both spatial and verbal tasks was negatively associated with working memory measures in the opposite domain. These results demonstrate that adults can learn both AD and NAD within a single session, but NAD learning is more easily disrupted than AD and both types of learning are sub-served by partially distinct cognitive processes. These findings increase our understanding of the processes governing the learning of AD and NAD in verbal and spatial domains.
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.