English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Under what conditions can recursion be learned? Effects of starting small in artificial grammar learning of recursive structure

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons37966

Poletiek,  Fenna H.
Institute of Psychology, Leiden University;
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Poletiek_et_al-2018-Cognitive_Science.pdf
(Publisher version), 399KB

Supplementary Material (public)

cogs12685-sup-0001-appendixa-d.docx
(Supplementary material), 79KB

Citation

Poletiek, F. H., Conway, C. M., Ellefson, M. R., Lai, J., Bocanegra, B. R., & Christiansen, M. H. (2018). Under what conditions can recursion be learned? Effects of starting small in artificial grammar learning of recursive structure. Cognitive Science, 42(8), 2855-2889. doi:10.1111/cogs.12685.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0002-5272-1
Abstract
It has been suggested that external and/or internal limitations paradoxically may lead to superior learning, that is, the concepts of starting small and less is more (Elman, 1993; Newport, 1990). In this paper, we explore the type of incremental ordering during training that might help learning, and what mechanism explains this facilitation. We report four artificial grammar learning experiments with human participants. In Experiments 1a and 1b we found a beneficial effect of starting small using two types of simple recursive grammars: right‐branching and center‐embedding, with recursive embedded clauses in fixed positions and fixed length. This effect was replicated in Experiment 2 (N = 100). In Experiment 3 and 4, we used a more complex center‐embedded grammar with recursive loops in variable positions, producing strings of variable length. When participants were presented an incremental ordering of training stimuli, as in natural language, they were better able to generalize their knowledge of simple units to more complex units when the training input “grew” according to structural complexity, compared to when it “grew” according to string length. Overall, the results suggest that starting small confers an advantage for learning complex center‐embedded structures when the input is organized according to structural complexity.