ArticleLearning & behavior2022
Nonhuman primates learn adjacent dependencies but fail to learn nonadjacent dependencies in a statistical learning task with a salient cue.
Article in Learning & behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A neurophysiological perspective on the integration between incidental learning and cognitive control.Communications biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is ample evidence that humans and nonhuman animals can learn complex statistical regularities presented within various types of input. However, humans outperform their nonhuman primate counterparts when it comes to recognizing relationships that exist across one or several intervening stimuli (nonadjacent dependencies). This is especially true when the two elements in the dependency do not share any perceptual similarity (arbitrary associations). In the present study, we investigated whether manipulating the saliency of the predictive stimulus would enhance nonadjacent dependency learning in nonhuman primates. Rhesus macaques and tufted capuchins engaged in a computerized signal detection task that included sequences that were random in nature, included an adjacent dependency, or included a nonadjacent dependency. We manipulated the saliency of the predictive stimulus, such that the predictor jittered in place on the screen in some grammar blocks, as well as the transitional probability (the likelihood of the stimulus preceding the target to accurately predict the target's appearance) from block to block. Some monkeys evidenced learning of adjacent dependencies by faster response times to targets that followed a predictive stimulus compared to targets that were not preceded by a predictor. However, consistent with the body of evidence that indicates that nonhuman animals' statistical learning mechanisms are not at the same level of sophistication as humans', there was no evidence that monkeys learned nonadjacent dependencies of arbitrary associations, even when the salient cue was present.
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.