Limits...
Working memory and the enactment effect in early Alzheimer's disease.

Charlesworth LA, Allen RJ, Morson S, Burn WK, Souchay C - ISRN Neurol (2014)

Bottom Line: Instruction sequences were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participants (subject-performed task).In both groups and for all sequence lengths, recall was superior in the subject-performed condition than the verbal-only condition.Individuals with Alzheimer's disease showed a deficit in free recall of recently learned instruction sequences relative to older adult controls, yet both groups show a significant benefit from performing actions themselves at encoding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Psychological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.

ABSTRACT
This study examines the enactment effect in early Alzheimer's disease using a novel working memory task. Free recall of action-object instruction sequences was measured in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (n = 14) and older adult controls (n = 15). Instruction sequences were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participants (subject-performed task). In both groups and for all sequence lengths, recall was superior in the subject-performed condition than the verbal-only condition. Individuals with Alzheimer's disease showed a deficit in free recall of recently learned instruction sequences relative to older adult controls, yet both groups show a significant benefit from performing actions themselves at encoding. The subject-performed task shows promise as a tool to improve working memory in early Alzheimer's disease.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Schematic task diagram of a 3 action sequence. In each condition participants attempted five 3-action sequences, followed by five 4-action sequences, and so on until all sequence lengths were completed or until the participant was unable to correctly recall any action-object pairs from the instruction sequence. SPT: subject-performed task; VT: verbal-only task.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927760&req=5

fig1: Schematic task diagram of a 3 action sequence. In each condition participants attempted five 3-action sequences, followed by five 4-action sequences, and so on until all sequence lengths were completed or until the participant was unable to correctly recall any action-object pairs from the instruction sequence. SPT: subject-performed task; VT: verbal-only task.

Mentions: Two encoding conditions were completed by each participant. Instructions were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task, VT) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participant themselves (subject-performed task, SPT) (see Figure 1 for a schematic representation of each encoding task). In the SPT condition, each action-object pair was performed by the participant immediately after verbal presentation; for instance, “Tap the yellow ruler” <enactment> “then spin the blue pen” <enactment> “then flip the red rubber” <enactment>. In the VT condition, participants listened only and were restricted from touching any of the objects. The performance of actions was self-paced in the SPT condition, and a two-second delay separated verbal presentation of each action-object pair in the VT condition to control for this. In both conditions a test phase immediately followed verbal presentation of each instruction sequence, in which participants were asked to verbally recall the entire multiaction sequence. Serial order recall was not explicitly required.


Working memory and the enactment effect in early Alzheimer's disease.

Charlesworth LA, Allen RJ, Morson S, Burn WK, Souchay C - ISRN Neurol (2014)

Schematic task diagram of a 3 action sequence. In each condition participants attempted five 3-action sequences, followed by five 4-action sequences, and so on until all sequence lengths were completed or until the participant was unable to correctly recall any action-object pairs from the instruction sequence. SPT: subject-performed task; VT: verbal-only task.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927760&req=5

fig1: Schematic task diagram of a 3 action sequence. In each condition participants attempted five 3-action sequences, followed by five 4-action sequences, and so on until all sequence lengths were completed or until the participant was unable to correctly recall any action-object pairs from the instruction sequence. SPT: subject-performed task; VT: verbal-only task.
Mentions: Two encoding conditions were completed by each participant. Instructions were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task, VT) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participant themselves (subject-performed task, SPT) (see Figure 1 for a schematic representation of each encoding task). In the SPT condition, each action-object pair was performed by the participant immediately after verbal presentation; for instance, “Tap the yellow ruler” <enactment> “then spin the blue pen” <enactment> “then flip the red rubber” <enactment>. In the VT condition, participants listened only and were restricted from touching any of the objects. The performance of actions was self-paced in the SPT condition, and a two-second delay separated verbal presentation of each action-object pair in the VT condition to control for this. In both conditions a test phase immediately followed verbal presentation of each instruction sequence, in which participants were asked to verbally recall the entire multiaction sequence. Serial order recall was not explicitly required.

Bottom Line: Instruction sequences were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participants (subject-performed task).In both groups and for all sequence lengths, recall was superior in the subject-performed condition than the verbal-only condition.Individuals with Alzheimer's disease showed a deficit in free recall of recently learned instruction sequences relative to older adult controls, yet both groups show a significant benefit from performing actions themselves at encoding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Psychological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.

ABSTRACT
This study examines the enactment effect in early Alzheimer's disease using a novel working memory task. Free recall of action-object instruction sequences was measured in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (n = 14) and older adult controls (n = 15). Instruction sequences were read out loud by the experimenter (verbal-only task) or read by the experimenter and performed by the participants (subject-performed task). In both groups and for all sequence lengths, recall was superior in the subject-performed condition than the verbal-only condition. Individuals with Alzheimer's disease showed a deficit in free recall of recently learned instruction sequences relative to older adult controls, yet both groups show a significant benefit from performing actions themselves at encoding. The subject-performed task shows promise as a tool to improve working memory in early Alzheimer's disease.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus