Scientists have found that people who are particularly good at learning patterns and sequences tend to struggle with tasks that require active thinking and decision-making. Their new research npj science of learningfound a negative correlation between statistical learning and executive function, suggesting that enhancement of one may lead to a slight decline in the other. This finding provides valuable insight into the competitive interactions that underpin our cognitive skills.
The motivation behind this research arose from a desire to better understand how different cognitive systems in the brain interact and potentially interfere with each other. Central to this research are her two fundamental cognitive processes: implicit statistical learning and executive function.
Implicit statistical learning is an important cognitive skill that allows individuals to unconsciously detect patterns and regularities in their environment, supporting abilities in areas ranging from language acquisition to social interaction. Executive functions, on the other hand, are higher-level cognitive processes essential for planning, decision-making, correcting mistakes, and adapting to new and complex situations, and are primarily managed by the prefrontal cortex.
This research was driven by the hypothesis of competitive interactions between these systems, known as the “competition hypothesis.” This hypothesis posits that reliance on one cognitive system can reduce the effectiveness and engagement of the other. Previous studies have provided preliminary evidence suggesting such an interaction, but were limited by small sample sizes and narrow assessments of cognitive ability. Building on this foundation, the researchers aimed to provide clearer insight into how these cognitive processes coexist or compete in the brain.
“Our brains are complex ecosystems. Different neurocognitive processes are constantly interacting. Sometimes this interaction is cooperative, but what is so exciting and interesting is that these interactions It can even be competitive,” the study authors said. Dezu Nemeth from the INSERM Lyon Neuroscience Research Center in France.
“In other words, competition exists between different neurocognitive processes in the brain. This is something I have been studying for years. In this paper, we show that skill learning and statistical learning, which underlie predictive processes, are We showed that there is a negative correlation with frontal lobe-related functions such as functional and control functions.”
The researchers conducted two experiments. Study 1 involved 186 young people in France who first underwent a 2-day session in which they completed an alternating serial reaction time (ASRT) task, which measures statistical learning. In this task, participants responded to a visual stimulus (an arrow pointing in one of four directions) by pressing the corresponding button on a response box. Unbeknownst to the participants, these stimuli followed structured sequences interspersed with random elements, allowing the researchers to determine how quickly and accurately individuals followed these patterns without explicit instruction. We were able to measure whether it could be learned and predicted.
The following day, a battery of neuropsychological tests assessed various executive functions, including cognitive flexibility, inhibition, and working memory. Inclusion criteria included being right-handed, being under 35 years of age, and having minimal musical training, as these factors are known to influence cognitive processing .
Similarly, Study 2 replicated the structure of Study 1, but included 157 Hungarian university students, with some modifications to adapt to local resources and context. The her ASRT task in this study used images of the dog’s head and keyboard responses and was self-paced, allowing the researchers to test the consistency of the learning measures under different procedural conditions. As in Study 1, the second session involved testing executive function through a set of equivalent tasks that were slightly adapted for local execution.
In both studies, we observed consistent negative correlations between statistical learning and most measures of executive function. This suggests that people who excel at tasks that require a high degree of executive control, such as complex problem-solving and decision-making, engage in implicit learning processes that rely on subconscious detection of patterns and regularities; This suggests that you may find it more difficult to receive its benefits. in the environment.
“It’s very surprising that this competition was the background for skill learning,” Nemeth said.
The researchers used factor analytic techniques to further examine the data and found that tasks measuring specific aspects of executive function, particularly verbal fluency and complex working memory, were most strongly associated with these negative correlations. It has become clear that The researchers argue that these execution tasks require active control and manipulation of information, a process that can interfere with the passive automatic pattern recognition that characterizes implicit statistical learning. We hypothesized that this competition could occur.
This finding challenges the traditional view of cognitive abilities as isolated skills and instead emphasizes the interactive and potentially competitive nature of different cognitive systems in the brain.
“Humans have multiple learning and memory processes and systems,” Nemeth told PsyPost. “So there is no such thing as a ‘learning’ or ‘memory’ system. Instead, there are learning (i.e., multiple learning processes) and memory systems (i.e., multiple memory systems). We have never seen this before. When you want to learn something completely new, a new pattern, a completely new sequence from your environment, you learn better if your brain’s prefrontal cortex (executive function) is less efficient.”
“In other words, if you want to learn a new skill, like playing a new instrument, it’s really good if the functions associated with the prefrontal network are weak. That’s very counterintuitive. Many school performances… We see the opposite: If you need to understand a history or biology lesson, a strong prefrontal cortex is best and best suited.”
However, the effect size was modest, indicating that this relationship, although statistically significant, may not be very strong. This suggests that other factors not measured in this study may also play an important role in cognitive performance. Nevertheless, the discovery is “very important for basic research,” Nemeth said. “They tell us a lot about how our brains work. The question is whether we can translate these results into practice.”
“These results are the first of their kind in this field,” Nemeth added. “However, it is important to recognize that executive function (prefrontal cortex functions) and statistical learning (predictive processes) are not monolithic constructs. Rather, they encompass numerous executive functions and different aspects of statistical learning. doing.”
“An important line of inquiry concerns whether certain executive function and statistical learning components show positive or negative correlations with each other. When do they compete and when do they cooperate? This question extends to the cerebral level as well. My aim is to uncover the brain mechanisms underlying these interactions.”
the study, “Evidence for a competitive relationship between executive functions and statistical learning” is written by Felipe Pedraza, Bence C. Farkas, Teodora Vecony, Frédéric Hessebart, Romanée Felipon, Imola Mihalec, Karolina Janacek, Lois Anders, Barbara Tillman, Gaen Plancher, Dezu This is Nemeth.
