Cited by 523Visual perception and processing mechanismsMemory and Neural MechanismsFace Recognition and Perception

Neural Evidence of Statistical Learning: Efficient Detection of Visual Regularities Without Awareness

Open access
Turk-Browne, Nicholas B., Scholl, Brian J., Chun, Marvin M., Johnson, Marcia K.·2009·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Our environment contains regularities distributed in space and time that can be detected by way of statistical learning. This unsupervised learning occurs without intent or awareness, but little is known about how it relates to other types of learning, how it affects perceptual processing, and how quickly it can occur. Here we use fMRI during statistical learning to explore these questions. Participants viewed statistically structured versus unstructured sequences of shapes while performing a task unrelated to the structure. Robust neural responses to statistical structure were observed, and these responses were notable in four ways: First, responses to structure were observed in the striatum and medial temporal lobe, suggesting that statistical learning may be related to other forms of associative learning and relational memory. Second, statistical regularities yielded greater activation in category-specific visual regions (object-selective lateral occipital cortex and word-selective ventral occipito-temporal cortex), demonstrating that these regions are sensitive to information distributed in time. Third, evidence of learning emerged early during familiarization, showing that statistical learning can operate very quickly and with little exposure. Finally, neural signatures of learning were dissociable from subsequent explicit familiarity, suggesting that learning can occur in the absence of awareness. Overall, our findings help elucidate the underlying nature of statistical learning.

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 · 10.1162/jocn.2009.21131

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • PP makes opposite predictions depending on whether activity represents the transmission of sensory predictions (enhanced activity) or the integration of these predictions with bottom-up activity in prediction error units (reduced activity).

    “PP makes opposite predictions depending on whether activity represents the transmission of sensory predictions 49 , 82 , 97 , 114 , 115 (enhanced activity) or the integration of these predictions with bottom‐up activity in prediction error units (reduced activity).”

    From Evaluating the neurophysiological evidence for predictive processing as a model of perception (2020) · cites this paper as [97]

    The Discussion section, “Statistical Learning and Perception” (page unavailable), reports stronger visual-cortex responses to statistically structured stimuli. It does not identify those responses as the transmission of sensory predictions or set out the claimed contrast with reduced activity in prediction-error units; it also offers attentional enhancement as an alternative explanation. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Turk-Browne, N. B., Scholl, B. J., Chun, M. M., & Johnson, M. K.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2009-10-01
Volume
21
Issue
10
Pages
1934-1945
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2107135123
Cited by
523
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 20
FWCI
5.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG009253, AG 09253, R37AG009253)
  • National Eye Institute (EY 014193, R01EY014193, P30EY000785)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
statistical learning, visual regularity, striatum, medial temporal lobe, associative learning, relational memory, lateral occipital cortex, ventral occipitotemporal cortex, implicit learning, awareness, familiarity, sequence learning, functional MRI
MeSH terms
Adult, Association Learning, Awareness, Brain, Brain Mapping, Discrimination Learning, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Recognition, Psychology, Young Adult

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