2009
DOI: 10.1080/09541440802097951
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seeing and hearing in space and time: Effects of modality and presentation rate on implicit statistical learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

10
98
1
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
10
98
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…[102]). Consider as an example the demonstration that rate of presentation has differential effects in auditory and visual statistical learning [103]. One possibility is that this differential effect arises because there are different processes underlying visual and audio statistical learning.…”
Section: Challenges For a Memory-based Perspectivementioning
confidence: 99%
“…[102]). Consider as an example the demonstration that rate of presentation has differential effects in auditory and visual statistical learning [103]. One possibility is that this differential effect arises because there are different processes underlying visual and audio statistical learning.…”
Section: Challenges For a Memory-based Perspectivementioning
confidence: 99%
“…[64]), or, relatedly, unsupervised versus supervised learning settings (see [65] for a discussion of the role of feedback in perceptual category learning). An additional factor that was shown to affect SL performance is the rate of presentation-with opposite effects of both the inter stimulus interval and the actual stimulus duration on SL performance in the visual versus auditory modality ( [35,36]; but see [66]). Whether rate of presentation constitutes a separate facet, or simply affects peripheral aspects to SL such as the encoding of individual elements, with different constraints in different modalities (see [11]), deserves further investigation.…”
Section: (A) Modality Specificitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[6]), and that statistical contingencies are extracted across both time and space (e.g. [8], though with different biases; see [35]). Admittedly, to date there is little unequivocal evidence showing that these phenomena are governed by non-overlapping computations and necessarily result in different learning constraints.…”
Section: (A) Modality Specificitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, insufficient evidence exists to attribute the lack of correlation to psychometric properties, task demands, or to potentially different processes underlying SL as a function of adjacency. Similarly, consider demonstrations that visual SL shows different learning constraints than audio SL: the optimal rate of presentation across these modalities is quite distinct, such that the visual modality requires a slower rate of presentation than the auditory modality for best learning [43,44]. This may be due to the fact that there are different processes underlying audio and visual SL.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%