Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>Taza</jats:italic> in Spanish refers to cups and mugs in English, whereas glass refers to different glass types in Spanish: <jats:italic>copa</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>vaso</jats:italic>. It is still unclear whether such categorical distinctions induce early perceptual differences in speakers of different languages. In this study, for the first time, we report symmetrical effects of terminology on preattentive indices of categorical perception across languages. Native speakers of English or Spanish saw arrays of cups, mugs, <jats:italic>copas</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>vasos</jats:italic> flashed in streams. Visual mismatch negativity, an implicit electrophysiological correlate of perceptual change in the peripheral visual field, was modulated for categorical contrasts marked in the participants’ native language but not for objects designated by the same label. Conversely, P3a, an index of attentional orienting, was modulated only for missing contrasts in the participants’ native language. Thus, whereas native labels influenced participants’ preattentive perceptual encoding of objects, nonverbally encoded dissociations reoriented their attention at a later processing stage.</jats:p>

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>What is the relationship between literacy skills and implicit learning? To address previous mixed findings, we compared school‐aged readers, typical (CON, <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 54) and with dyslexia (DYS, <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 53), in relation to their performance on a serial reaction time task. For the first time, we also included an isolated spelling deficit group (ISD, <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 30) to control for distinctive effects of reading and spelling deficits. A linear reaction times analysis did not reveal between‐group differences in implicit learning. However, further examination revealed that most CON (65%) and ISD (63%) were implicit learners, whereas most DYS were nonlearners (64%). Brain activity showed differences in early learning phases: CON learners and DYS nonlearners activated the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and left insula more than other groups. Our findings imply that implicit learning is more frequently disrupted in children with dyslexia than in typical readers, and that activation of the left IFG and insula contributes to effective learning in the latter group but it does not in the former.</jats:p>

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Concrete symbols (e.g., <jats:italic>sun</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>run</jats:italic>) can be learned in the context of objects and actions, thereby grounding their meaning in the world. However, it is controversial whether a comparable avenue to semantic learning exists for abstract symbols (e.g., <jats:italic>democracy</jats:italic>). When we simulated the putative brain mechanisms of conceptual/semantic grounding using brain‐constrained deep neural networks, the learning of instances of concrete concepts outside of language contexts led to robust neural circuits generating substantial and prolonged activations. In contrast, the learning of instances of abstract concepts yielded much reduced and only short‐lived activity. Crucially, when conceptual instances were learned in the context of wordforms, circuit activations became robust and long‐lasting for both concrete and abstract meanings. These results indicate that, although the neural correlates of concrete conceptual representations can be built from grounding experiences alone, abstract concept formation at the neurobiological level is enabled by and requires the correlated presence of linguistic forms.</jats:p>

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>This study explored the effects of practice schedule on the processing of new second language (L2) vocabulary and resulting knowledge. Participants were 107 low‐achieving adolescents attending a vocational high school in Korea. They were randomly assigned to one of three practice groups and completed a L2 English–L1 Korean paired‐associates learning task. The blocking group practiced one word at a time before switching to different words (e.g., A/A/A/B/B/B/C/C/C); the interleaving group practiced multiple words in sequence (e.g., A/B/C/A/B/C/A/B/C); and the hybrid group had both blocked and interleaved practice. Results revealed that (a) interleaved practice alone posed undesirable difficulty for low achievers, (b) blocked practice in the early learning phase facilitated the development of new declarative knowledge, and (c) hybrid practice produced more robust long‐term retention than blocking and interleaving. The findings are discussed in relation to real‐time processing accuracy, reaction time, coefficient of variation, and meaning recognition test outcomes. Additionally, I explore possible applications of these findings in developing optimal algorithm‐based software for vocabulary learning.</jats:p>