scholarly journals Do infants retain the statistics of a statistical learning experience? Insights from a developmental cognitive neuroscience perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 372 (1711) ◽  
pp. 20160054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learners ◽  
Statistical Learning ◽  
Memory Trace ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Human Infants ◽  
Critical Gap ◽  
Knowledge Of Language ◽  
Long Term Retention

Statistical structure abounds in language. Human infants show a striking capacity for using statistical learning (SL) to extract regularities in their linguistic environments, a process thought to bootstrap their knowledge of language. Critically, studies of SL test infants in the minutes immediately following familiarization, but long-term retention unfolds over hours and days, with almost no work investigating retention of SL. This creates a critical gap in the literature given that we know little about how single or multiple SL experiences translate into permanent knowledge. Furthermore, different memory systems with vastly different encoding and retention profiles emerge at different points in development, with the underlying memory system dictating the fidelity of the memory trace hours later. I describe the scant literature on retention of SL, the learning and retention properties of memory systems as they apply to SL, and the development of these memory systems. I propose that different memory systems support retention of SL in infant and adult learners, suggesting an explanation for the slow pace of natural language acquisition in infancy. I discuss the implications of developing memory systems for SL and suggest that we exercise caution in extrapolating from adult to infant properties of SL. This article is part of the themed issue ‘New frontiers for statistical learning in the cognitive sciences’.

scholarly journals Sticking with Spanish: Reasons for Study and Motivation Maintenance in Adult Beginner Distance Language Learners

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 40-60
Author(s):  
Concha Furnborough ◽  
James A. Coleman
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learners ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Skills ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Distance Learners ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Motivational Orientations ◽  
Ideal L2 Self ◽  
The Ideal

Abstract This paper examines the reasons for study of adult beginner distance learners of Spanish and the relationships between those reasons and motivation maintenance. A survey of 563 Open University UK students found motivational orientations distinct from those of young people in earlier studies. Adult learners who maintained their motivation also demonstrated a greater number of reasons for study. Their motivation embraced intrinsic and extrinsic, integrative and instrumental orientations, short-term and long-term ambitions, and an L2 self both ideal and realistically attainable. During their course module they focused more consistently than others on the language skills they had targeted, and expressed increased enjoyment of the learning experience. This study suggests that achieving ‘softer’ short-term goals encourages persistence towards longer-term goals which reflect the ideal L2 self.

Suppressed, but Not Forgotten

2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beat Meier ◽  
Anja König ◽  
Samuel Parak ◽  
Katharina Henke
Keyword(s):  
Memory Trace ◽  
Thought Suppression ◽  
Test Phase ◽  
Indirect Test ◽  
Final Test ◽  
Test Experiment ◽  
And Control ◽  
Cue Words ◽  
The Impact

This study investigates the impact of thought suppression over a 1-week interval. In two experiments with 80 university students each, we used the think/no-think paradigm in which participants initially learn a list of word pairs (cue-target associations). Then they were presented with some of the cue words again and should either respond with the target word or avoid thinking about it. In the final test phase, their memory for the initially learned cue-target pairs was tested. In Experiment 1, type of memory test was manipulated (i.e., direct vs. indirect). In Experiment 2, type of no-think instructions was manipulated (i.e., suppress vs. substitute). Overall, our results showed poorer memory for no-think and control items compared to think items across all experiments and conditions. Critically, however, more no-think than control items were remembered after the 1-week interval in the direct, but not in the indirect test (Experiment 1) and with thought suppression, but not thought substitution instructions (Experiment 2). We suggest that during thought suppression a brief reactivation of the learned association may lead to reconsolidation of the memory trace and hence to better retrieval of suppressed than control items in the long term.

Long-term retention is greater following closed-book tests than open-book tests

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja K. Agarwal ◽  
Jeffrey D. Karpicke ◽  
Sean H. Kang ◽  
Henry L. Roediger ◽  
Kathleen B. McDermott
Keyword(s):  
Open Book ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention

Registered Report: Transcriptional Analysis of Savings Memory Suggests Forgetting Is Due to Retrieval Failure

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Calin-Jageman ◽  
Irina Calin-Jageman ◽  
Tania Rosiles ◽  
Melissa Nguyen ◽  
Annette Garcia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Memory Trace ◽  
Aplysia Californica ◽  
Transcriptional Response ◽  
Transcriptional Analysis ◽  
Retrieval Failure ◽  
Initial Learning ◽  
Rigorous Test ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Induced Changes

[[This is a Stage 2 Registered Report manuscript now accepted for publication at eNeuro. The accepted Stage 1 manuscript is posted here: https://psyarxiv.com/s7dft, and the pre-registration for the project is available here (https://osf.io/fqh8j, 9/11/2019). A link to the final Stage 2 manuscript will be posted after peer review and publication.]] There is fundamental debate about the nature of forgetting: some have argued that it represents the decay of the memory trace, others that the memory trace persists but becomes inaccessible due to retrieval failure. These different accounts of forgetting lead to different predictions about savings memory, the rapid re-learning of seemingly forgotten information. If forgetting is due to decay, then savings requires re-encoding and should thus involve the same mechanisms as initial learning. If forgetting is due to retrieval failure, then savings should be mechanistically distinct from encoding. In this registered report we conducted a pre-registered and rigorous test between these accounts of forgetting. Specifically, we used microarray to characterize the transcriptional correlates of a new memory (1 day after training), a forgotten memory (8 days after training), and a savings memory (8 days after training but with a reminder on day 7 to evoke a long-term savings memory) for sensitization in Aplysia californica (n = 8 samples/group). We found that the re-activation of sensitization during savings does not involve a substantial transcriptional response. Thus, savings is transcriptionally distinct relative to a newer (1-day old) memory, with no co-regulated transcripts, negligible similarity in regulation-ranked ordering of transcripts, and a negligible correlation in training-induced changes in gene expression (r = .04 95% CI [-.12, .20]). Overall, our results suggest that forgetting of sensitization memory represents retrieval failure.

Retrieval practice promotes long-term retention irrespective of the placement

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
alice latimier ◽  
Arnaud Rierget ◽  
Son Thierry Ly ◽  
Franck Ramus
Keyword(s):  
Retention Interval ◽  
Retrieval Practice ◽  
Memory Retention ◽  
Term Retention ◽  
Long Term Retention

The current study aimed at comparing the effect of three placements of the re-exposure episodes on memory retention (interpolated-small, interpolated-medium, postponed), depending on whether retrieval practice or re-reading was used, and on retention interval (one week vs one month).

Stage 1 Registered Report Manuscript - Transcriptional Correlates of Savings Memory: Is Forgetting Due to Decay or Retrieval Failure?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Calin-Jageman ◽  
Irina Calin-Jageman ◽  
Tania Rosiles ◽  
Melissa Nguyen ◽  
Annette Garcia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Memory Trace ◽  
Aplysia Californica ◽  
Retrieval Failure ◽  
Initial Learning ◽  
Rigorous Test ◽  
Regulated Gene Expression ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Weak Similarity

[[This is a Stage 1 Registered Report manuscript. The project was submitted for review to eNeuro. Upon revision and acceptance, this version of the manuscript was pre-registered on the OSF (9/11/2019, https://osf.io/fqh8j) (but due to an oversight not posted as a preprint until July 2020). A Stage 2 manuscript is now posted as a pre-print (https://psyarxiv.com/h59jv) and is under review at eNeuro. A link to the final Stage 2 manuscript will be added when available.]]There is fundamental debate about the nature of forgetting: some have argued that it represents the decay of the memory trace, others that the memory trace persists but becomes inaccessible due to retrieval failure. These different accounts of forgetting make different predictions about savings memory, the rapid re-learning of seemingly forgotten information. If forgetting is due to decay then savings requires re-encoding and should thus involve the same mechanisms as initial learning. If forgetting is due to retrieval-failure then savings should be mechanistically distinct from encoding. In this registered report we conducted a pre-registered and rigorous test between these accounts of forgetting. Specifically, we used microarray to characterize the transcriptional correlates of a new memory (1 day from training), a forgotten memory (8 days from training), and a savings memory (8 days from training but with a reminder on day 7 to evoke a long-term savings memory) for sensitization in Aplysia californica (n = 8 samples/group). We find that the transcriptional correlates of savings are [highly similar / somewhat similar / unique] relative to new (1-day-old) memories. Specifically, savings memory and a new memory share [X] of [Y] regulated transcripts, show [strong / moderate / weak] similarity in sets of regulated transcripts, and show [r] correlation in regulated gene expression, which is [substantially / somewhat / not at all] stronger than at forgetting. Overall, our results suggest that forgetting represents [decay / retrieval-failure / mixed mechanisms].

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document