Practice on perceptual tasks can lead to long-lasting, stimulus-specific improvements. Rapid stimulus-specific learning, assessed 24 hours after practice, has been found with just 105 practice trials in a face identification task. However, a much longer time course for stimulus-specific learning has been found in other tasks. Here, we examined 1) whether rapid stimulus-specific learning occurs for unfamiliar, non-face stimuli in a texture identification task; 2) the effects of varying practice across a range from just 21 trials up to 840 trials; and 3) if rapid, stimulus-specific learning persists over a 1-week, as well as a 1-day, interval. Observers performed a texture identification task in two sessions separated by one day (Experiment 1) or 1 week (Experiment 2). Observers received varying amounts of practice (21, 63, 105, or 840 training trials) in session 1 and completed 840 trials in session 2. In session 2, one-half of the observers in each group performed the task with the same textures as in session 1, and one-half switched to novel textures (same vs. novel conditions). In both experiments we found that stimulus-specific learning – defined as the difference in response accuracy in the same and novel conditions – increased as a linear function of the log number of session 1 training trials and was statistically significant after approximately 100 training trials. The effects of stimulus novelty did not differ across experiments. These results support the idea that stimulus-specific learning in our task arises gradually and continuously through practice, perhaps concurrently with general learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bennett et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: