Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40900397›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025

Statistical learning prioritizes abstract over item-specific representations.

Mei Zhou, Shelley Xiuli Tong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Mei ZhouHuman Communication, Learning, and Development, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Shelley Xiuli TongHuman Communication, Learning, and Development, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. xltong@hku.hk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3319-4609

Funding

the Research Fellow Scheme RFS 2021-7H05the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China 17612222the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China 17616323
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Statistical learning optimizes limited working memory by abstracting probabilistic associations among specific items. However, the cognitive mechanisms responsible for the working memory representation of abstract and item-specific information remain unclear. This study developed a learning-memory representation paradigm and tested three participant groups across three conditions: control (Experiment 1), item-specific encoding (Experiment 2), and abstract encoding (Experiment 3). All groups were first shown picture-artificial-character pairs that contained abstract semantic categories at high (100%), moderate (66.7%), and low (33.3%) probability levels and item-specific information (16.7%). Participants then completed an online visual search task that simultaneously assessed statistical learning and memory representation by examining how abstract or item-specific distractors influenced their speed for searching artificial characters. In the control condition, participants spent more time searching abstract than item-specific distractors across all probability levels, indicating abstract prioritization. In the item-specific condition, abstract prioritization was absent. In the abstract condition, enhanced prioritization of abstract information was observed for moderate and low, but not high, probability items. These findings suggest that statistical learning is central to the abstraction process, with input probabilities and encoding strategies jointly shaping the formation of abstract and item-specific representations. This process depends on a flexible working memory system that dynamically adjusts prioritization, particularly when inputs are uncertain.

Indexed as

LearningMemory, Short-TermPattern Recognition, VisualProbability LearningAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAbstract knowledgeInternal representationItem-specific encodingStatistical learningWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID40900397
PMCPMC12627146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.