MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3096698718 · doi:10.1167/jov.20.11.293

Attention to different statistical structures changes over the course of learning

2020· article· en· W3096698718 on OpenAlexaff
Tess Allegra Forest, Noam Siegelman, Amy S. Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictabilityEntropy (arrow of time)Computer scienceStimulus (psychology)Statistical learningStatisticsCognitive psychologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceAudiologyMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have shown that attention allocation can be determined by the statistical structure of our visual environments: infants attend to moderately predictable input over highly predictable or highly unpredictable input (Kidd et. al., 2012), and adults attend to regular over irregular stimuli (Zhao et. al., 2013). While these results show learners are sensitive to how predictable different input is, no study to date has directly examined how attention to differently structured input shifts as a function of experience. Moreover, learners may be able to extract more or less information from a particular part of their world at any given moment, but it remains unknown whether we flexibly shift attention based on how much information could be gained from a particular stimulus. Here, we had adults (n=75) complete a visual statistical learning experiment in which streams of information were presented simultaneously in four locations, in four levels of predictability: (1) completely random, (2) low predictability, (3) medium predictability, and (4) completely predictable. Intermittent search trials measured where participants attended over the course of the experiment by indexing reaction times in each location. We modeled trial-by-trial entropy in each location to measure how much information could be gained from that location at any given point during learning. Our results show that as the experiment progressed, participants shifted from attending to medium predictability location to attending to lower levels of regularity locations (low predictability and random stream). Additionally, trial-by-trial entropy and time interacted strongly to predict where participants attended, such that over the course of learning higher entropy locations were attended more. This provides the first demonstration that as adults learn the environmental regularities, they gradually shift their attention to less predictable sources of information, and that learners are sensitive to how much information they can gain from a particular source.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→