Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Siegelman, Noam
• Frost, Ram

Titel

Statistical learning as an individual ability: Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence

Ist Teil von

• Journal of memory and language, 2015-05, Vol.81, p.105-120

Ort / Verlag

United States: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2015

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• •We provide a theoretical discussion and analysis of SL as an individual capacity.•We show that SL, when measured by appropriate tasks, is a reliable and stable capacity of an individual.•We show that SL is not nested within higher-order cognitive capacities.•We show that SL is a componential rather than unified ability.•We discuss the power of within-subject studies in investigating individual differences in SL. Although the power of statistical learning (SL) in explaining a wide range of linguistic functions is gaining increasing support, relatively little research has focused on this theoretical construct from the perspective of individual differences. However, to be able to reliably link individual differences in a given ability such as language learning to individual differences in SL, three critical theoretical questions should be posed: Is SL a componential or unified ability? Is it nested within other general cognitive abilities? Is it a stable capacity of an individual? Following an initial mapping sentence outlining the possible dimensions of SL, we employed a battery of SL tasks in the visual and auditory modalities, using verbal and non-verbal stimuli, with adjacent and non-adjacent contingencies. SL tasks were administered along with general cognitive tasks in a within-subject design at two time points to explore our theoretical questions. We found that SL, as measured by some tasks, is a stable and reliable capacity of an individual. Moreover, we found SL to be independent of general cognitive abilities such as intelligence or working memory. However, SL is not a unified capacity, so that individual sensitivity to conditional probabilities is not uniform across modalities and stimuli.