Visual perceptual learning models, as constrained by orientation and location specificities, propose that learning either reflects changes in V1 neuronal tuning or reweighting specific V1 inputs in either the visual cortex or higher areas. Here we demonstrate that, with a training-plus-exposure procedure, in which observers are trained at one orientation and either simultaneously or subsequently passively exposed to a second transfer orientation, perceptual learning can completely transfer to the second orientation in tasks known to be orientation-specific. However, transfer fails if exposure precedes the training. These results challenge the existing specific perceptual learning models by suggesting a more general perceptual learning process. We propose a rule-based learning model to explain perceptual learning and its specificity and transfer. In this model, a decision unit in high-level brain areas learns the rules of reweighting the V1 inputs through training. However, these rules cannot be applied to a new orientation/location because the decision unit cannot functionally connect to the new V1 inputs that are unattended or even suppressed after training at a different orientation/location, which leads to specificity. Repeated orientation exposure or location training reactivates these inputs to establish the functional connections and enable the transfer of learning.

The generalization of learning offers a unique window for investigating the nature of motor learning. Error-based motor learning reportedly cannot generalize to distant directions because the aftereffects are direction specific. This direction specificity is often regarded as evidence that motor adaptation is model-based learning, and is constrained by neuronal tuning characteristics in the primary motor cortices and the cerebellum. However, recent evidence indicates that motor adaptation also involves model-free learning and explicit strategy learning. Using rotation paradigms, here we demonstrate that savings (faster relearning), which is closely related to model-free learning and explicit strategy learning, is also direction specific. However, this new direction specificity can be abolished when the participants receive exposure to the generalization directions via an irrelevant visuomotor gain-learning task. Control evidence indicates that this exposure effect is weakened when direction error signals are absent during gain learning. Therefore, the direction specificity in visuomotor learning is not solely related to model-based learning; it may also result from the impeded expression of model-free learning and explicit strategy learning with untrained directions. Our findings provide new insights into the mechanisms underlying motor learning, and may have important implications for practical applications such as motor rehabilitation. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Motor learning is more useful if it generalizes to untrained scenarios when needed, especially for sports training and motor rehabilitation. However, as a form of motor learning, motor adaptation is typically direction specific. Here we first show that savings with motor adaptation, an index for model-free learning and explicit strategy learning in motor learning, is also direction specific. However, the participants' additional exposure to untrained directions via an irrelevant gain-learning task can enable the complete generalization of learning. Our findings challenge existing models of motor generalization and may have important implications for practical applications.

Perceptual learning is often orientation and location specific, which may indicate neuronal plasticity in early visual areas. However, learning specificity diminishes with additional exposure of the transfer orientation or location via irrelevant tasks, suggesting that the specificity is related to untrained conditions, likely because neurons representing untrained conditions are neither bottom-up stimulated nor top-down attended during training. To demonstrate these top-down and bottom-up contributions, we applied a "continuous flash suppression" technique to suppress the exposure stimulus into sub-consciousness, and with additional manipulations to achieve pure bottom-up stimulation or top-down attention with the transfer condition. We found that either bottom-up or top-down influences enabled significant transfer of orientation and Vernier discrimination learning. These results suggest that learning specificity may result from under-activations of untrained visual neurons due to insufficient bottom-up stimulation and/or top-down attention during training. High-level perceptual learning thus may not functionally connect to these neurons for learning transfer.

Practice improves discrimination of many basic visual features, such as contrast, orientation, and positional offset [1-7]. Perceptual learning of many of these tasks is found to be retinal location specific, in that learning transfers little to an untrained retinal location [1, 6-8]. In most perceptual learning models, this location specificity is interpreted as a pointer to a retinotopic early visual cortical locus of learning [1, 6-11]. Alternatively, an untested hypothesis is that learning could occur in a central site, but it consists of two separate aspects: learning to discriminate a specific stimulus feature ("feature learning"), and learning to deal with stimulus-nonspecific factors like local noise at the stimulus location ("location learning") [12]. Therefore, learning is not transferable to a new location that has never been location trained. To test this hypothesis, we developed a novel double-training paradigm that employed conventional feature training (e.g., contrast) at one location, and additional training with an irrelevant feature/task (e.g., orientation) at a second location, either simultaneously or at a different time. Our results showed that this additional location training enabled a complete transfer of feature learning (e.g., contrast) to the second location. This finding challenges location specificity and its inferred cortical retinotopy as central concepts to many perceptual-learning models and suggests that perceptual learning involves higher nonretinotopic brain areas that enable location transfer.

Visual perceptual learning models, as constrained by orientation and location specificities, propose that learning either reflects changes in V1 neuronal tuning or reweighting specific V1 inputs in either the visual cortex or higher areas. Here we demonstrate that, with a training-plus-exposure procedure, in which observers are trained at one orientation and either simultaneously or subsequently passively exposed to a second transfer orientation, perceptual learning can completely transfer to the second orientation in tasks known to be orientation-specific. However, transfer fails if exposure precedes the training. These results challenge the existing specific perceptual learning models by suggesting a more general perceptual learning process. We propose a rule-based learning model to explain perceptual learning and its specificity and transfer. In this model, a decision unit in high-level brain areas learns the rules of reweighting the V1 inputs through training. However, these rules cannot be applied to a new orientation/location because the decision unit cannot functionally connect to the new V1 inputs that are unattended or even suppressed after training at a different orientation/location, which leads to specificity. Repeated orientation exposure or location training reactivates these inputs to establish the functional connections and enable the transfer of learning.

Visual perceptual learning models, as constrained by orientation and location specificities, propose that learning either reflects changes in V1 neuronal tuning or reweighting specific V1 inputs in either the visual cortex or higher areas. Here we demonstrate that, with a training-plus-exposure procedure, in which observers are trained at one orientation and either simultaneously or subsequently passively exposed to a second transfer orientation, perceptual learning can completely transfer to the second orientation in tasks known to be orientation-specific. However, transfer fails if exposure precedes the training. These results challenge the existing specific perceptual learning models by suggesting a more general perceptual learning process. We propose a rule-based learning model to explain perceptual learning and its specificity and transfer. In this model, a decision unit in high-level brain areas learns the rules of reweighting the V1 inputs through training. However, these rules cannot be applied to a new orientation/location because the decision unit cannot functionally connect to the new V1 inputs that are unattended or even suppressed after training at a different orientation/location, which leads to specificity. Repeated orientation exposure or location training reactivates these inputs to establish the functional connections and enable the transfer of learning.