Implicit learning of sequential structures has been investigated mostly for visual, spatial, or motor learning, but rarely for temporal structure learning. The few experiments investigating temporal structure learning have concluded that temporal structures can be learned only when coupled with another structural dimension, such as musical pitch or spatial location. In these studies, the temporal structures were without metrical organization and were dependent upon participants’ response times (Response-to-Stimulus Intervals). In our study, two experiments investigated temporal structure learning based on Inter-Onset-Intervals in the presence of an uncorrelated second dimension (ordinal structure) with metrically organized temporal structures. Our task was an adaptation of the classical Serial Reaction Time paradigm, using an implicit task in the auditory domain (syllable identification). Reaction times (RT) revealed that participants learned the temporal structures over the exposure blocks (decrease in RT) without a correlated ordinal dimension. The introduction of a test block with a novel temporal structure slowed RT and exemplified the typical implicit learning profile. Post-test results suggested that participants did not have explicit knowledge of the metrical temporal structures. These findings provide the first evidence of the learning of temporal structure with an uncorrelated ordinal structure, and set a foundation for further investigation of temporal cognition.
Listeners are able to cope with between-speaker variability in speech that stems from anatomical sources (i.e. individual and sex differences in vocal tract size) and sociolinguistic sources (i.e. accents). We hypothesized that listeners adapt to these two types of variation differently because prior work indicates that adapting to speaker/sex variability may occur pre-lexically while adapting to accent variability may require learning from attention to explicit cues (i.e. feedback). In Experiment 1, we tested our hypothesis by training native Dutch listeners and Australian-English (AusE) listeners without any experience with Dutch or Flemish to discriminate between the Dutch vowels /I/ and /ε/ from a single speaker. We then tested their ability to classify /I/ and /ε/ vowels of a novel Dutch speaker (i.e. speaker or sex change only), or vowels of a novel Flemish speaker (i.e. speaker or sex change plus accent change). We found that both Dutch and AusE listeners could successfully categorize vowels if the change involved a speaker/sex change, but not if the change involved an accent change. When AusE listeners were given feedback on their categorization responses to the novel speaker in Experiment 2, they were able to successfully categorize vowels involving an accent change. These results suggest that adapting to accents may be a two-step process, whereby the first step involves adapting to speaker differences at a pre-lexical level, and the second step involves adapting to accent differences at a contextual level, where listeners have access to word meaning or are given feedback that allows them to appropriately adjust their perceptual category boundaries.
ObjectiveSupervisor assessments of trainee competence are integral to ensuring that clinical psychology trainees reach competency benchmarks. The commonly used Clinical Psychology Practicum Competencies Rating Scale (CΨPRS) has been shown to elicit inflated ratings of competency. Hence, the aim of this study is to examine whether brief supervisor training reduces ratings by providing objective criteria with which supervisors can assess trainee competency.MethodThe ratings included were of 124 psychology trainees from nine Australian university clinical programmes. Of 170 supervisors, 32 completed the online training immediately prior to commencing the CΨPRS. Training required supervisors to rate the competency level described in five standardised vignettes (Beginner through to Competent). Vignette ratings, as determined by a panel of expert supervisors, were provided as feedback. A sixth calibration vignette was also rated (no feedback provided). Firstly, CΨPRS ratings from the trained and untrained supervisors were compared. Secondly, the difference between supervisor and expert ratings of the calibration vignettes were compared across trained and untrained groups.ResultsTrained supervisors provided lower CΨPRS ratings than untrained supervisors. In addition, trained supervisors (vs untrained supervisors) provided ratings of the calibration vignette that more accurately matched the ratings provided by the expert panel.ConclusionsBrief online training using standardised vignettes was associated with lower CΨPRS ratings. The standardised vignettes helped calibrate supervisors’ ratings and likely attuned supervisors to the skills and competency levels that are expected at particular developmental stages. As a consequence, training appeared to reduce ratings, arguably resulting in more accurate assessments of trainee performance.
Current competency frameworks for practitioners have been derived through expert consensus but lack empirical validation. We examined the stepwise anatomy of competence using the Clinical Psychology Practicum Competencies Rating Scale with items presented in fixed (Dataset I, 195 trainees) and random order (Dataset II, 353 trainees). Cluster analyses of supervisor ratings revealed that fixed‐order items yielded clusters that were divided along thematic lines similar to a‐priori domains (e.g., intervention, ethics). Random‐order items yielded a markedly different set of clusters structured around knowledge, skills, relationship competencies, and meta‐competencies. The results offer a novel and insightful conceptualization of the anatomy of competence with critical implications for training and assessment. Further, random presentation of competencies increases item independence and attenuates rater bias.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.