ArticleNeurobiology of learning and memory2020
Distinct neural networks for detecting violations of adjacent versus nonadjacent sequential dependencies: An fMRI study.
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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning regularities in noise engages both neural predictive activity and representational changes.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Learning Type I and Type II regularities between multiple sequentially presented stimulus categories.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Elucidating a statistical learning brain network: Coordinate-based meta-analyses and functional connectivity profiles of artificial grammar learning in healthy adults.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- A neurophysiological perspective on the integration between incidental learning and cognitive control.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Incidental auditory category learning and visuomotor sequence learning do not compete for cognitive resources.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Brain-correlates of processing local dependencies within a statistical learning paradigm.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
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.