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...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |