ArticleLearning & behavior2023
Simple questions on simple associations: regularity extraction in non-human primates.
Article in Learning & behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Addressing the theory crisis in statistical learning research.NPJ science of learning · 2025Review
- The Lifetime of Sequential Memory Traces in the Absence of Language.Cognitive science · 2025Article
- Incidental learning and social-communicative abilities in children with developmental language disorder: Further evaluating the implicit learning deficit hypothesis.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When human and non-human animals learn sequences, they manage to implicitly extract statistical regularities through associative learning mechanisms. In two experiments conducted with a non-human primate species (Guinea baboons, Papio papio), we addressed simple questions on the learning of simple AB associations appearing in longer noisy sequences. Using a serial reaction time task, we manipulated the position of AB within the sequence, such that it could be either fixed (by appearing always at the beginning, middle, or end of a four-element sequence; Experiment 1) or variable (Experiment 2). We also tested the effect of sequence length in Experiment 2 by comparing the performance on AB when it was presented at a variable position within a sequence of four or five elements. The slope of RTs from A to B was taken for each condition as a measurement of learning rate. While all conditions differed significantly from a no-regularity baseline, we found strong evidence that the learning rate did not differ between the conditions. These results indicate that regularity extraction is not impacted by the position of the regularity within a sequence and by the length of the sequence. These data provide novel general empirical constraints for modeling associative mechanisms in sequence learning.
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.