Exploring Variation Between Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments: Outlining a Meta-Analysis Approach

Can adults with developmental dyslexia apply statistical knowledge to a new context?

We investigated transfer of artificial grammar learning in adults with and without dyslexia in 3 experiments. In Experiment 1, participants implicitly learned an artificial grammar system and were tested on new items that included the same symbols. In Experiment 2, participants were given practice with letter strings and then tested on strings created with a different letter set. In Experiment 3, participants were given practice with shapes and then tested on strings created with different shapes. Results show that in Experiment 1, both groups demonstrated utilization of pre-trained instances in the subsequent grammaticality judgement task, while in Experiments 2 (orthographic) and 3 (nonorthographic), only typically developed participants demonstrated application of knowledge from training to test. A post hoc analysis comparing between the experiments suggests that being trained and tested on an orthographic task leads to better performance than a nonorthographic task among typically developed adults but not among adults with dyslexia. Taken together, it appears that following extensive training, individuals with dyslexia are able to form stable representations from sequential stimuli and use them in a subsequent task that utilizes strings of similar symbols. However, the manipulation of the symbols challenges this ability.

Statistical Learning of Language: A Meta-Analysis Into 25 Years of Research

Statistical learning is a key concept in our understanding of language acquisition. Ample work has highlighted its role in numerous linguistic functions-yet statistical learning is not a unitary construct, and its consistency across different language properties remains unclear. In a meta-analysis of auditory-linguistic statistical learning research spanning the last 25 years, we evaluated how learning varies across different language properties in infants, children, and adults and surveyed the methodological trends in the literature. We found robust learning across stimuli (syllables, words, etc.) in infants, and across stimuli and structures (adjacent dependencies, non-adjacent dependencies, etc.) in adults, with larger effect sizes when multiple cues were present. However, the analysis also showed significant publication bias and revealed a tendency toward using a narrow range of simplified language properties, including in the strength of the transitional probabilities used during training. Bayes factor analyses revealed prevalent data insensitivity of moderators commonly hypothesized to impact learning, such as the amount of exposure and transitional probability strength, which contradict core theoretical assumptions in the field. Methodological factors, such as the tasks used at test, also significantly impacted effect sizes in adults and children, suggesting that choice of task may critically constrain current theories of how statistical learning operates. Collectively, our results suggest that auditory-linguistic statistical learning has the kind of robustness needed to play a foundational role in language acquisition, but that more research is warranted to reveal its full potential.

Individual differences in artificial and natural language statistical learning

Statistical learning (SL) is considered a cornerstone of cognition. While decades of research have unveiled the remarkable breadth of structures that participants can learn from statistical patterns in experimental contexts, how this ability interfaces with real-world cognitive phenomena remains inconclusive. These mixed results may arise from the fact that SL is often treated as a general ability that operates uniformly across all domains, typically assuming that sensitivity to one kind of regularity implies equal sensitivity to others. In a preregistered study, we sought to clarify the link between SL and language by aligning the type of structure being processed in each task. We focused on the learning of trigram patterns using artificial and natural language statistics, to evaluate whether SL predicts sensitivity to comparable structures in natural speech. Adults were trained and tested on an artificial language incorporating statistically-defined syllable trigrams. We then evaluated their sensitivity to similar statistical structures in natural language using a multiword chunking task, which examines serial recall of high-frequency word trigrams-one of the building blocks of language. Participants' aptitude in learning artificial syllable trigrams positively correlated with their sensitivity to high-frequency word trigrams in natural language, suggesting that similar computations span learning across both tasks. Short-term SL taps into key aspects of long-term language acquisition when the statistical structures-and the computations used to process them-are comparable. Better aligning the specific statistical patterning across tasks may therefore provide an important steppingstone toward elucidating the relationship between SL and cognition at large.

Editors' Review and Introduction: Learning Grammatical Structures: Developmental, Cross-Species, and Computational Approaches

Human languages all have a grammar, that is, rules that determine how symbols in a language can be combined to create complex meaningful expressions. Despite decades of research, the evolutionary, developmental, cognitive, and computational bases of grammatical abilities are still not fully understood. "Artificial Grammar Learning" (AGL) studies provide important insights into how rules and structured sequences are learned, the relevance of these processes to language in humans, and whether the cognitive systems involved are shared with other animals. AGL tasks can be used to study how human adults, infants, animals, or machines learn artificial grammars of various sorts, consisting of rules defined typically over syllables, sounds, or visual items. In this introduction, we distill some lessons from the nine other papers in this special issue, which review the advances made from this growing body of literature. We provide a critical synthesis, identify the questions that remain open, and recognize the challenges that lie ahead. A key observation across the disciplines is that the limits of human, animal, and machine capabilities have yet to be found. Thus, this interdisciplinary area of research firmly rooted in the cognitive sciences has unearthed exciting new questions and venues for research, along the way fostering impactful collaborations between traditionally disconnected disciplines that are breaking scientific ground.