Department of Psychology, City, University of London, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, United States of America.
Cognition. 2023 Jan;230:105290. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105290. Epub 2022 Oct 11.
Statistical learning relies on detecting the frequency of co-occurrences of items and has been proposed to be crucial for a variety of learning problems, notably to learn and memorize words from fluent speech. Endress and Johnson (2021) (hereafter EJ) recently showed that such results can be explained based on simple memory-less correlational learning mechanisms such as Hebbian Learning. Tovar and Westermann (2022) (hereafter TW) reproduced these results with a different Hebbian model. We show that the main differences between the models are whether temporal decay acts on both the connection weights and the activations (in TW) or only on the activations (in EJ), and whether interference affects weights (in TW) or activations (in EJ). Given that weights and activations are linked through the Hebbian learning rule, the networks behave similarly. However, in contrast to TW, we do not believe that neurophysiological data are relevant to adjudicate between abstract psychological models with little biological detail. Taken together, both models show that different memory-less correlational learning mechanisms provide a parsimonious account of Statistical Learning results. They are consistent with evidence that Statistical Learning might not allow learners to learn and retain words, and Statistical Learning might support predictive processing instead.
统计学习依赖于检测项目的共同出现频率,被认为对各种学习问题至关重要,特别是用于从流畅的语音中学习和记忆单词。Endress 和 Johnson(2021 年)(简称 EJ)最近表明,这些结果可以基于简单的无记忆相关学习机制(如赫布学习)来解释。Tovar 和 Westermann(2022 年)(简称 TW)使用不同的赫布模型重现了这些结果。我们表明,模型之间的主要区别在于,时间衰减是否同时作用于连接权重和激活(在 TW 中)或仅作用于激活(在 EJ 中),以及干扰是否影响权重(在 TW 中)或激活(在 EJ 中)。鉴于权重和激活通过赫布学习规则相互关联,网络的行为相似。然而,与 TW 不同的是,我们不认为神经生理学数据对于裁决具有很少生物学细节的抽象心理模型具有相关性。总之,这两个模型都表明,不同的无记忆相关学习机制为统计学习结果提供了一种简约的解释。它们与以下证据一致,即统计学习可能不允许学习者学习和保留单词,而统计学习可能支持预测性处理。