Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.

BACKGROUND:Although feedback on performance is generally thought to promote perceptual learning, the role and necessity of feedback remain unclear. We investigated the effect of providing varying amounts of positive feedback while listeners attempted to discriminate between three identical tones on...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sygal Amitay, Lorna Halliday, Jenny Taylor, Ediz Sohoglu, David R Moore
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2010-03-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2843743?pdf=render
id doaj-1b04a694a34444e881da0e2f21e092a7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1b04a694a34444e881da0e2f21e092a72020-11-25T01:33:20ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032010-03-0153e981610.1371/journal.pone.0009816Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.Sygal AmitayLorna HallidayJenny TaylorEdiz SohogluDavid R MooreBACKGROUND:Although feedback on performance is generally thought to promote perceptual learning, the role and necessity of feedback remain unclear. We investigated the effect of providing varying amounts of positive feedback while listeners attempted to discriminate between three identical tones on learning frequency discrimination. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Using this novel procedure, the feedback was meaningless and random in relation to the listeners' responses, but the amount of feedback provided (or lack thereof) affected learning. We found that a group of listeners who received positive feedback on 10% of the trials improved their performance on the task (learned), while other groups provided either with excess (90%) or with no feedback did not learn. Superimposed on these group data, however, individual listeners showed other systematic changes of performance. In particular, those with lower non-verbal IQ who trained in the no feedback condition performed more poorly after training. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:This pattern of results cannot be accounted for by learning models that ascribe an external teacher role to feedback. We suggest, instead, that feedback is used to monitor performance on the task in relation to its perceived difficulty, and that listeners who learn without the benefit of feedback are adept at self-monitoring of performance, a trait that also supports better performance on non-verbal IQ tests. These results show that 'perceptual' learning is strongly influenced by top-down processes of motivation and intelligence.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2843743?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sygal Amitay
Lorna Halliday
Jenny Taylor
Ediz Sohoglu
David R Moore
spellingShingle Sygal Amitay
Lorna Halliday
Jenny Taylor
Ediz Sohoglu
David R Moore
Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Sygal Amitay
Lorna Halliday
Jenny Taylor
Ediz Sohoglu
David R Moore
author_sort Sygal Amitay
title Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
title_short Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
title_full Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
title_fullStr Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
title_full_unstemmed Motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
title_sort motivation and intelligence drive auditory perceptual learning.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2010-03-01
description BACKGROUND:Although feedback on performance is generally thought to promote perceptual learning, the role and necessity of feedback remain unclear. We investigated the effect of providing varying amounts of positive feedback while listeners attempted to discriminate between three identical tones on learning frequency discrimination. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Using this novel procedure, the feedback was meaningless and random in relation to the listeners' responses, but the amount of feedback provided (or lack thereof) affected learning. We found that a group of listeners who received positive feedback on 10% of the trials improved their performance on the task (learned), while other groups provided either with excess (90%) or with no feedback did not learn. Superimposed on these group data, however, individual listeners showed other systematic changes of performance. In particular, those with lower non-verbal IQ who trained in the no feedback condition performed more poorly after training. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:This pattern of results cannot be accounted for by learning models that ascribe an external teacher role to feedback. We suggest, instead, that feedback is used to monitor performance on the task in relation to its perceived difficulty, and that listeners who learn without the benefit of feedback are adept at self-monitoring of performance, a trait that also supports better performance on non-verbal IQ tests. These results show that 'perceptual' learning is strongly influenced by top-down processes of motivation and intelligence.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2843743?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT sygalamitay motivationandintelligencedriveauditoryperceptuallearning
AT lornahalliday motivationandintelligencedriveauditoryperceptuallearning
AT jennytaylor motivationandintelligencedriveauditoryperceptuallearning
AT edizsohoglu motivationandintelligencedriveauditoryperceptuallearning
AT davidrmoore motivationandintelligencedriveauditoryperceptuallearning
_version_ 1725077897516941312