Useless, describes a problem but offers NO solution.
Statistical Learning Impairments as a Consequence of Stroke
- 1Laboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
- 2Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Statistical learning is the implicit learning of the
contingencies between sequential stimuli, typically from mere exposure.
It is present from infancy onward, and plays a role in functions from
language learning to selective attention. Despite these observations,
there are few data on whether statistical learning capacity changes with
age or after brain injury. In order to examine how brain injury affects
the ability to learn and update statistical representations, we had
young control and healthy elder participants, as well as participants
with either left or right brain injury, perform an auditory statistical
learning task. Participants listened to two languages with made-up words
that were defined by the transition probability between syllables.
Following passive listening, learning was assessed with a
two-alternative forced choice test for the most familiar word. As in
previous studies, we found that young controls have a learning capacity
limitation for statistical learning; a second language is less well
learned than the first, and this statistical learning capacity limit is
attenuated with age. Additionally, we found that brain damaged patients,
whether with left or right hemispheric damage, showed impaired
statistical learning. This impairment was not explained by aphasia or
cognitive deficits. As statistical learning is a critical skill for
daily life, a better appreciation of the nature of this impairment will
improve our understanding of the cognitive effects of brain injury and
could lead to new rehabilitation strategies.
Introduction
Our ability to quickly learn consistent relationships between sequential stimuli is called statistical learning (Turk-Browne, 2012).
One prominent example of statistical learning is our ability to group
sounds presented in a consistent order. Present in infancy, the
statistical learning of word borders is held to be critical to normal
language development (Saffran and Kirkham, 2018).
Statistical learning is not, however, restricted to infants and
children. This ability persists into adulthood and operates across
multiple domains. In the spatial domain, we can learn that some events
are more likely to happen in one location than another (Druker and Anderson, 2010; Cort and Anderson, 2013; Jiang et al., 2013). In the temporal domain, we learn that some sequences are more likely than others (Maljkovic and Nakayama, 1996; Fiser and Aslin, 2002), and we learn to predict interval durations (Danckert and Anderson, 2015).
Statistical learning does not depend on an active, deliberate search
for structure, though it may potentially be aided by such strategies (Gebhart et al., 2009).
Many different brain areas are involved in statistical
learning. In a study using a word segmentation task, similar to what is
to be reported here, Karuza et al. (2013)
found significant changes in metabolic activity in the pars opercularis
and pars triangularis of the left frontal lobe. However, when the
statistical learning tasks are broadened beyond language based tasks,
other brain regions are also highlighted. In their 2015 review, Schapiro and Turk-Browne (2015)
reported that the superior temporal gyrus (important for sequential
analysis) and the temporal-parietal junction (when regularities are
violated) are also frequently found in functional imaging work on
statistical learning tasks.
While statistical learning is functionally pervasive,
has restricted anatomical correlates, and is present into adulthood,
little is known about statistical learning capacity as we grow older, or
as a result of brain injury. If statistical learning were to
contribute, as seems likely, to implicit learning capacity in elders,
then it is likely that events such as strokes would impact it. This
would also have an impact on rehabilitation, as current stroke
rehabilitation commonly emphasizes learning through repetition.
The hypothesis that brain injury might impair
statistical learning after right hemisphere damage is consistent with
our prior data on tracking environmental regularities in patients with
stroke (Shaqiri and Anderson, 2012; Shaqiri et al., 2013; Stöttinger et al., 2014a,b). However, other data suggests that either hemisphere could be important. Wolford et al. (2000)
studied two split-brain participants and a cohort of people with
unilateral brain damage. Participants made predictions for two
independent sequences of events that could appear in either their right
or left visual fields, and thus, be processed by either the left or
right hemisphere of the split-brain participants. Depending on which
visual field the stimuli were presented in, it was found that both
hemispheres were able to form, independently, statistical
representations for the stimuli.
Thus, we know that statistical learning is present into
adulthood, that it is supported by both hemispheres, and that it is
functionally important. What we do not know is how statistical learning
is impacted by brain injury, whether there are unique hemispheric
effects, nor precisely which brain areas are critical for brain damage
to impact statistical learning. We also do not know if statistical
learning deficits after brain injury, should such occur, can be
re-mediated by massed repetition, breaks, or information about the
material to be learned, all of which have been suggested to improve the
statistical learning capacity of healthy young individuals (Gebhart et al., 2009; Franco et al., 2011).
We initiated these experiments with several expectations: based on our prior probability learning work (Shaqiri and Anderson, 2013),
we expected the presence of neglect to interact with statistical
learning deficits. Therefore, we partitioned our right brain damaged
(RBD) participants into subgroups with (+N) and without (−N) neglect. In
some prior work on updating mental models, we had found differences
between left (LBD) and right hemisphere stroke patients (Danckert et al., 2012),
and so we also included a LBD group. While many types of learning
decline with age, not all do, and this may be particularly true for some
forms of implicit memory (Howard and Howard, 2015).
Thus, we included both old (OC) and young controls (YC) to compare the
stroke patients to participants of the same age, and to address age
effects. However, our initial results showed a generally poor
performance of all the brain damaged groups. We therefore undertook a
more exploratory, less hypothesis driven effort to characterize the
extent and nature of the impairment, its sensitivity to manipulations
[that had been shown to work in healthy adults (Gebhart et al., 2009)],
and a broader investigation of healthy participants to confirm that we
were able to reproduce the basic effects reported previously with these
testing materials. In the end, we ran several small studies in which all
participants were tested on their ability to learn a single language
and that allowed us to do a large omnibus test of statistical learning
ability. In addition, we could also test the effects of the secondary
manipulations in a broad way. Because these secondary manipulations are
exploratory, there might be a greater risk of type II error than type I,
thus, we have not adjusted for multiple statistical comparisons.
Readers should be aware of the exploratory natures of our studies and
the risk that any statistical significance may be inflated by multiple
comparisons.
The outline of the paper is as follows. We first present
the methods for all experiments and for all groups: healthy young,
healthy elders, RBD +N, RBD −N, and LBD. We begin the results section
with omnibus analyses. We show that our young adult data replicates
prior work and that brain damage impairs statistical learning. We report
the specific experiments in more detail to look for hints of any
beneficial effects of increased exposure, different length rest breaks,
or information about the nature of the learning task. Lastly, we discuss
the fact that, despite our expectations, damage to either the left or
right hemisphere appears equally likely to produce statistical learning
impairments. We conclude with an exploratory voxel lesion symptom
mapping analysis to ask, regardless of hemisphere, which brain region is
most predictive of statistical learning impairments.
No comments:
Post a Comment