Fig 1.
A matrix representing the relationship between event A and event X.
A and ¬A respectively represent the occurrence and non-occurrence of leading stimulus A; X and ¬X respectively represent the occurrence and non-occurrence of trailing stimulus X.
Fig 2.
Experimental procedure and results of Experiment 1.
(a) Statistical regularities depicted as image transition matrix with stimuli pairs in training phase. Ls represent leading stimuli, and Ts represent trailing stimuli. For clarity, only one representative object pair per condition is shown. In the actual experiment, each condition included two distinct object pairs constructed with the same statistical structure. (b) Trial sequence in the training and test phases. On every trial, participants saw a leading object followed by a trailing object and indicated as quickly and accurately as possible whether the two objects belonged to the same category (electronic vs. non-electronic). (c) Distribution of individual reaction-time benefits (Unexpected – Expected) for each condition. Each colored dot represents one participant. Gray violins depict kernel-density estimates of the data distribution (violin width ∝ probability density). The solid black horizontal lines indicate the mean, and the thin vertical lines show the 95% confidence interval around the mean. The dotted horizontal line marks zero benefit. This visualization highlights the consistency of the expectation-driven facilitation across participants and conditions.
Fig 3.
Experimental procedure and results of Experiment 2.
(a) Statistical regularities depicted as image transition matrix with stimuli pairs in training phase. Ls represent leading stimuli, and Ts represent trailing stimuli. For clarity, only one representative object pair per condition is shown. In the actual experiment, each condition included two distinct object pairs constructed with the same statistical structure. (b) RT benefit (Unexpected – Expected) distributions for each condition. Colored dots represent individual participants, gray violins indicate the kernel-density estimate of the distribution, and black horizontal and vertical lines denote the mean and its 95% confidence interval, respectively. The dotted horizontal line marks zero benefit. The pattern of results demonstrates a reliable expectation effect across conditions, with stronger facilitation in conditions predicted by DFH rather than by CP or ΔP, highlighting DFH’s central role in visual statistical learning.