Cited by 39Multisensory perception and integrationSleep and Wakefulness ResearchMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Cross-modal transfer of statistical information benefits from sleep

Open access
Durrant, Simon J., Cairney, Scott A., Lewis, Penelope A.·2016·Cortex

Abstract

Extracting regularities from a sequence of events is essential for understanding our environment. However, there is no consensus regarding the extent to which such regularities can be generalised beyond the modality of learning. One reason for this could be the variation in consolidation intervals used in different paradigms, also including an opportunity to sleep. Using a novel statistical learning paradigm in which structured information is acquired in the auditory domain and tested in the visual domain over either 30 min or 24 h consolidation intervals, we show that cross-modal transfer can occur, but this transfer is only seen in the 24 h group. Importantly, the extent of cross-modal transfer is predicted by the amount of slow wave sleep (SWS) obtained. Additionally, cross-modal transfer is associated with the same pattern of decreasing medial temporal lobe and increasing striatal involvement which has previously been observed to occur across 24 h in unimodal statistical learning. We also observed enhanced functional connectivity after 24 h in a network of areas which have been implicated in cross-modal integration including the precuneus and the middle occipital gyrus. Finally, functional connectivity between the striatum and the precuneus was also enhanced, and this strengthening was predicted by SWS. These results demonstrate that statistical learning can generalise to some extent beyond the modality of acquisition, and together with our previously published unimodal results, support the notion that statistical learning is both domain-general and domain-specific.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cortex.2016.02.011

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Memory retention is improved by post-learning sleep.

    “Memory retention is improved by post-learning sleep [5–11], suggesting that sleep supports the consolidation of newly learned information.”

    From Sleep bolsters schematically incongruent memories (2022) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports better cross-modal use of learned statistical information after a 24-hour interval that included sleep, with performance related to slow-wave sleep. That supports a sleep-related memory benefit, but the paper studies a specific transfer task rather than memory retention generally; it also acknowledges that its design cannot fully separate the effects of sleep and elapsed time. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Sleep supports the consolidation of newly learned information.

    “Memory retention is improved by post-learning sleep [5–11], suggesting that sleep supports the consolidation of newly learned information.”

    From Sleep bolsters schematically incongruent memories (2022) · cites this paper as [8]

  • Sleep supports offline memory processing.

    “In conclusion, our online study adds to an extensive body of laboratory-based literature demonstrating that sleep supports offline memory processing [5–8].”

    From Sleep bolsters schematically incongruent memories (2022) · cites this paper as [8]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Durrant, S. J., Cairney, S. A., & Lewis, P. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Lincoln (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Corresponding author
Durrant, Simon J.
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
78
Pages
85-99
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2288051321
Cited by
39
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/F003048/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
statistical learning, cross-modal transfer, sleep, slow-wave sleep, memory consolidation, domain-general learning, domain-specific learning, medial temporal lobe, striatum, functional connectivity, precuneus, middle occipital gyrus, cross-modal integration
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Auditory Perception, Corpus Striatum, Humans, Learning, Memory, Parietal Lobe, Sleep, Temporal Lobe, Visual Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review