Brief memory reactivation may not improve visual perception

Visual perceptual learning often requires a substantial number of trials to observe significant learning effects. Previously Amar-Halpert et al. (2017) have shown that brief reactivation (5 trials/day) is sufficient to improve the performance of the texture discrimination task (TDT), yielding comparable improvements to those achieved through full practice (252 trials/day). The finding is important since it would refine our understanding of learning mechanisms and applications. In the current study, we attempted to replicate these experiments using a larger number of observers and an improved experimental design. Using between-group comparison, we did find significant improvements in the reactivation group and the full-practice group as Amar-Halpert et al. (2017) showed. However, these improvements were comparable to those of the no-reactivation group with no exposure to the TDT task over the same period. Importantly, our within-group comparison showed that both the reactivation and no-reactivation groups exhibited additional significant improvements after further practicing the TDT task for an additional three days, demonstrating that the full-practice effect was significantly superior to the effects of brief memory reactivation or simple test-retest. Besides, when refining the constant stimuli method with fewer stimulus levels and more trials per level, we still observed comparable improvements brought by the reactivation and no-reactivation groups. Therefore, our results suggested that brief memory reactivation may not significantly contribute to the improvement of perceptual learning, and traditional perceptual training could still be a necessary and effective approach for substantial improvements.