ArticleCognitive science2023
Chunking Versus Transitional Probabilities: Differentiating Between Theories of Statistical Learning.
Article in Cognitive science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- The lifetime of sequential memory traces.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are two main approaches to how statistical patterns are extracted from sequences: The transitional probability approach proposes that statistical learning occurs through the computation of probabilities between items in a sequence. The chunking approach, including models such as PARSER and TRACX, proposes that units are extracted as chunks. Importantly, the chunking approach suggests that the extraction of full units weakens the processing of subunits while the transitional probability approach suggests that both units and subunits should strengthen. Previous findings using sequentially organized, auditory stimuli or spatially organized, visual stimuli support the chunking approach. However, one limitation of prior studies is that most assessed learning with the two-alternative forced-choice task. In contrast, this pre-registered experiment examined the two theoretical approaches in sequentially organized, visual stimuli using an online self-paced task-arguably providing a more sensitive index of learning as it occurs-and a secondary offline familiarity judgment task. During the self-paced task, abstract shapes were covertly organized into eight triplets (ABC) where one in every eight was altered (BCA) from the canonical structure in a way that disrupted the full unit while preserving a subunit (BC). Results from the offline familiarity judgment task revealed that the altered triplets were perceived as highly familiar, suggesting the learned representations were relatively flexible. More importantly, results from the online self-paced task demonstrated that processing for subunits, but not unit-initial stimuli, was impeded in the altered triplet. The pattern of results is in line with the chunking approach to statistical learning and, more specifically, the TRACX model.
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.