A joint context with an active co-actor produces a steeper reaction-time learning slope than a baseline context with a passive observer in a complementary statistical learning task¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The decrease in RT from Block 1 to Block 6 was steeper in the joint context than the baseline context, indicating a facilitation effect of joint responding on sequence learning. → Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang 2024 q3 i? During the modulating phase, RTs followed a quadratic trend (first increasing and then decreasing), with the quadratic model fitting significantly better than the linear model. → Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang 2024 (2)

Evidence¶

Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang 2024¶

Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang. (2024). Interbrain neural correlates of self and other integration in joint statistical learning. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00280-4

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Behavioural LMM analysis of actors' RTs across Blocks 1–6 in dyads randomly assigned to a joint (both respond) or baseline (actor plus passive observer) context. The phase × context interaction was significant (β = −3.50, P = 0.007), with "the joint context exhibited a facilitation effect on sequence learning"; no printed effect size.

"However, the two-way interaction effects in learning phase × context were signi ficant (β = −3.50, SE = 1.28, t418 = −2.73, P = 0.007). This interaction demon- strated that the slope of RTs decreasing from Block 1 to Block 6 was steeper for the joint context compared to the baseline context"

Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang 2024 (2)¶

Zheng Zheng & Jun Wang. (2024). Interbrain neural correlates of self and other integration in joint statistical learning. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00280-4

q3 · i? · causal · r2

LMM comparison of linear versus quadratic models on modulating-phase RTs (Blocks 6–8) showed the quadratic model "had a signi ficantly better fit" (χ2 = 18.98, P < 0.001), i.e., RT first increased and then decreased; no printed effect size.

"Furthermore, model comparison supported the quadratic model (AIC = 2441.3, BIC = 2470), which had a signi ficantly better fit t h a n t h e l i n e a r model (AIC = 2458.2, BIC = 2486.5,χ2 = 18.98, P < 0.001; see Fig. 2a)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Inserting an interference sequence disrupted and then recovered joint-context performance: RT rose from Block 6 to 7 and fell from Block 7 to 8 only in the joint context — related
• Intra-brain theta-band functional connectivity between frontal and parietal regions declined more steeply during learning in the joint context than the baseline context — related
• P3 reductions during learning and P3 enhancement under interference occurred only for self-relevant trials in the joint context, with no learning effects on self-irrelevant trials — related
• Theta-band brain-to-brain coupling increased more steeply during learning in the joint context and was modulated by the presence or absence of statistical regularity — related
• People automatically represent the goals of a co-actor, impairing individual task performance — related
• In the joint context, NMF-derived BtBC cluster slopes predicted learning: Cluster 1 negatively with RT slope and Cluster 2 positively with intra-brain connectivity slope — related