Electrophysiological signatures of statistical segmentation: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Rattachement africain : be. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Statistical learning (SL), the ability to extract regularities from continuous sensory input, is widely studied using segmentation in embedded pattern learning (EPL) paradigms. Different electrophysiological measures, including event-related potentials (ERPs), steady-state responses (SSRs), and event-related spectral perturbations (ERSPs), have been proposed as neural signatures of statistical segmentation. However, the extent to which these measures provide consistent evidence remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of EEG and MEG studies to assess the evidence for these signatures in the current literature. After screening 635 records, 39 studies (46 experiments) contributed to the quantitative synthesis. We conducted separate meta-analyses of four signatures: N1 and N400 pattern-onset effects, emergence of pattern-rate SSRs, and suppression of item-rate SSRs. The results provided some evidence for an N400 effect and strong evidence for pattern-rate SSR enhancement, whereas neither N1 nor item-rate SSR effects reached statistical significance. No moderation effects were observed across the tested characteristics, with the exception of contrast type, which significantly moderated the N400 effect. A comparative model further indicated that pattern-rate SSRs provided the most robust evidence of statistical segmentation. We discuss how our results inform the interpretation of these signatures as neural indices of statistical segmentation and outline directions for future research.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Electrophysiological signatures of statistical segmentation: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- Date Crossref
- 16/09/2026
- Éditeur
- Center for Open Science
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Ghent University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Universiteit Gent pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Ghent University et Universiteit Gent.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.