Sign in
NeuroscienceCognition
Peer-reviewed journal article

Feature distribution learning by passive exposure

David PascucciiD, Gizay Ceylan, Arni Kjalar KristjanssoniD

Abstract

Humans can rapidly estimate the statistical properties of groups of stimuli, including their average and variability. But recent studies of so-called Feature Distribution Learning (FDL) have shown that observers can quickly learn even more complex aspects of feature distributions. In FDL, observers learn the full shape of a distribution of features in a set of distractor stimuli and use this information to improve visual search: response times (RT) are slowed if the target feature lies inside the previous distractor distribution, and the RT patterns closely reflect the distribution shape. FDL requires only a few trials and is markedly sensitive to different distribution types. It is unknown, however, whether our perceptual system encodes feature distributions automatically and by passive exposure, or whether this learning requires active engagement with the stimuli. In two experiments, we sought to answer this question. During an initial exposure stage, participants passively viewed a display of 36 lines that included one orientation singleton or no singletons. In the following search display, they had to find an oddly oriented target. The orientations of the lines were determined either by a Gaussian or a uniform distribution. We found evidence for FDL only when the passive trials contained an orientation singleton. Under these conditions, RTs decreased as a function of the orientation distance between the target and the exposed distractor distribution. These results suggest that FDL can occur by passive exposure, but only if an orientation singleton appears during exposure to the distribution.

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
9
FWCI
0.77
Field percentile
top 35%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISJanini '22Schmid '23Richter '19Thorat '22Luthra '25Himberger '22
64% semantic matchNeuroscience
Daniel Janini, Christopher J. Hamblin, Arturo Deza+1 more·PLoS Computational Biology·Sep 26, 2022· 14 citations