Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40355520›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2025

Feature identification learning both shapes and is shaped by spatial object-similarity representations.

Jonathan K Doyon, Sarah Shomstein, Gabriela Rosenblau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Jonathan K DoyonDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., USA. jdoyon1@meei.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3904-7207
Sarah ShomsteinDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8278-6630
Gabriela RosenblauDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., USA. grosenblau@gwu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6122-0857

Funding

Modeling Social and Non-Social Learning in AutismR01MH116252 · NIMH · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI JACK, ALLISON ELIZABETH, ROSENBLAU, GABRIELA · 2020 to 2025
$1.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH116252U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) R01MH116252
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Object knowledge is bound together in semantic networks that can be spatially represented. How these knowledge representations shape and are in turn shaped by learning remains unclear. Here, we directly examined how object similarity representations impact implicit learning of feature dimensions and how learning, in turn, influences these representations. In a pre-experiment, 237 adult participants arranged object-pictures in a spatial arena, revealing semantic relatedness of everyday objects across categories: activity, fashion, and foods. The subsequent experiment assessed whether these semantic relationships played a role in implicitly learning specific object features in a separate adult participant group (N = 82). Participants inferred the meanings of two pseudo-words through feedback. Using computational modeling, we tested various learning strategies and established that learning was guided by semantic relationships quantified in the pre-experiment. Post-learning arrangements reflected object similarity representations as well as the learned feature. We directly show that similarity representations guide implicit learning and that learning in turn reshapes existing knowledge representations.

Identifiers

PMID40355520
PMCPMC12069083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.