Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32018026›Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of learning and memory2020

Distinct neural networks for detecting violations of adjacent versus nonadjacent sequential dependencies: An fMRI study.

Christopher M Conway, Leyla Eghbalzad, Joanne A Deocampo, Gretchen N L Smith, Sabrina Na, Tricia Z King

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of learning and memory, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Christopher M ConwayDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Neuroscience Institute, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Center for Childhood Deafness, Language, and Learning, Boys Town National Research Hospital, Omaha, NE, USA(1). Electronic address: christopher.conway@boystown.org.
Leyla EghbalzadDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Joanne A DeocampoDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Gretchen N L SmithDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sabrina NaDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Neuroscience Institute, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Tricia Z KingDepartment of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Neuroscience Institute, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Acquiring language with a cochlear implant: The role of sequential learningR01DC012037 · NIDCD · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI CONWAY, CHRISTOPHER · 2012 to 2016
$1.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012037
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to learn and process sequential dependencies is essential for language acquisition and other cognitive domains. Recent studies suggest that the learning of adjacent (e.g., "A-B") versus nonadjacent (e.g., "A-X-B") dependencies have different cognitive demands, but the neural correlates accompanying such processing are currently underspecified. We developed a sequential learning task in which sequences of printed nonsense syllables containing both adjacent and nonadjacent dependencies were presented. After incidentally learning these grammatical sequences, twenty-one healthy adults (age M = 22.1, 12 females) made familiarity judgments about novel grammatical sequences and ungrammatical sequences containing violations of the adjacent or nonadjacent structure while in a 3T MRI scanner. Violations of adjacent dependencies were associated with increased BOLD activation in both posterior (lateral occipital and angular gyrus) as well as frontal regions (e.g., medial frontal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus). Initial results indicated no regions showing significant BOLD activations for the violations of nonadjacent dependencies. However, when using a less stringent cluster threshold, exploratory analyses revealed that violations of nonadjacent dependencies were associated with increased activation in subcallosal cortex, paracingulate cortex, and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Finally, when directly comparing the adjacent condition to the nonadjacent condition, we found significantly greater levels of activation for the right superior lateral occipital cortex (BA 19) for the adjacent relative to nonadjacent condition. In sum, the detection of violations of adjacent and nonadjacent dependencies appear to involve distinct neural networks, with perceptual brain regions mediating the processing of adjacent but not nonadjacent dependencies. These results are consistent with recent proposals that statistical-sequential learning is not a unified construct but depends on the interaction of multiple neurocognitive mechanisms acting together.

Indexed as

AdultBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansLearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeural PathwaysPattern Recognition, VisualRecognition, PsychologyYoung AdultAngular gyrusAnterior cingulate cortexArtificial grammar learningNonadjacent dependenciesSequential processingStatistical learning

Identifiers

PMID32018026
PMCPMC7064258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.