As argued by Aslin and Newport (2012), the degree of generalization is a function of the patterning of the input to which the learner is exposed. Even canonical LY294002 concentration statistical-learning studies that only test exemplars drawn from the specific stimulus materials to which the learner is exposed can be viewed as an inference problem (Goldwater, Griffiths, & Johnson, 2009).

For example, the words and part-words used as test items in Saffran et al. (1996) were drawn from the continuous stream of syllables presented during the familiarization phase. Thus, neither of these test items were exact replicas of what had been presented for “learning”. Yet, infants readily showed reliable differences in “recognition” of these test items. Thus, the proper way to conceptualize any learning task is to ask what are the most plausible inferences that the learner could make based on the patterning of the input. Reeder, Newport, and Aslin (2013) provided extensive evidence that adults will either generalize freely or restrict generalization depending on the patterning of the context in which nonsense words are presented across a family of utterances. Their task consisted of listening to several hundred utterances of variable word lengths and then being tested on (1) a subset of these familiar utterances, (2)

a set of novel utterances that conformed to the underlying grammar, and (3) a set of novel utterances that violated the underlying grammar. NVP-AUY922 solubility dmso Crucially, the number of grammatical categories and which nonsense words were assigned to these categories were unknown to the subjects. In each of eight separate experiments, the patterning of the nonsense words that surrounded a critical target category differed—in some experiments all possible surrounding contexts were presented in Edoxaban the familiarization utterances, in others some of the surrounding contexts were consistently absent, and in yet others

only a single context was present. Thus, as in Gerken (2006), the surrounding contexts varied from providing consistent evidence for generalization to inconsistent evidence for generalization, and finally little or no evidence for generalization (i.e., strong evidence for restricting generalization). Moreover, in two follow-up experiments that more closely mimicked the variability in word frequency (K. D. Schuler, P. A. Reeder, E. L. Newport, & R. N. Aslin, unpublished data) and the presence of subcategories (Reeder, Newport, & Aslin, 2010) that add a further level of context, adults readily generalized or restricted generalization depending on these same principles of patterning in the surrounding contexts. Thus, distributional cues are sufficient to induce learning and modulate generalization.