Errorful learning improves recognition memory for new vocabulary for people living with memory and dysexecutive impairment following brain injury.

IF 1.7 3区 心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychological Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-21 DOI:10.1080/09602011.2023.2259017
Josie Briscoe, Joanna Doherty, Katy Burgess, Christopher Kent
{"title":"Errorful learning improves recognition memory for new vocabulary for people living with memory and dysexecutive impairment following brain injury.","authors":"Josie Briscoe, Joanna Doherty, Katy Burgess, Christopher Kent","doi":"10.1080/09602011.2023.2259017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A widely accepted view is that errorless learning is essential for supporting new learning in people with anterograde amnesia, but findings are mixed for those with a broader range of memory impairments. People at a chronic stage of recovery from brain injury (BI) with impaired memory and executive function (<i>N</i> = 26) were compared with adults in a comparison group without any known risks to brain function (<i>N</i> = 25). Learning techniques were compared using a \"Generate-and-correct\" and \"Read-only\" condition when learning novel word pairs. At test, both groups scored above chance and showed benefits of Generate-and-correct (error<i>ful</i> learning). Poor learners in the BI group were classified from \"flat\" learning slopes extracted from an independent word-pair learning task. Critically, poor learners showed no benefit, but also no decrement to learning, using the Generate-and-correct method. No group was harmed by errorful learning; all, except the poorest learners, benefitted from errorful learning. This study indicates, that in some rehabilitation settings, encouraging clients to guess the meaning of unfamiliar material (e.g., from cards, magazines, newspapers) and then correct their errors, could have benefits for recognition memory. Determining when and how errorful learning benefits learning is a key aim for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":54729,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"974-1004"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2023.2259017","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A widely accepted view is that errorless learning is essential for supporting new learning in people with anterograde amnesia, but findings are mixed for those with a broader range of memory impairments. People at a chronic stage of recovery from brain injury (BI) with impaired memory and executive function (N = 26) were compared with adults in a comparison group without any known risks to brain function (N = 25). Learning techniques were compared using a "Generate-and-correct" and "Read-only" condition when learning novel word pairs. At test, both groups scored above chance and showed benefits of Generate-and-correct (errorful learning). Poor learners in the BI group were classified from "flat" learning slopes extracted from an independent word-pair learning task. Critically, poor learners showed no benefit, but also no decrement to learning, using the Generate-and-correct method. No group was harmed by errorful learning; all, except the poorest learners, benefitted from errorful learning. This study indicates, that in some rehabilitation settings, encouraging clients to guess the meaning of unfamiliar material (e.g., from cards, magazines, newspapers) and then correct their errors, could have benefits for recognition memory. Determining when and how errorful learning benefits learning is a key aim for future research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对于脑损伤后有记忆和执行障碍的人来说,错误学习可以提高他们对新词汇的识别记忆。
一种被广泛接受的观点是,无错误学习对于支持顺行性健忘症患者的新学习至关重要,但对于那些有更广泛记忆障碍的人来说,研究结果喜忧参半。处于脑损伤(BI)慢性恢复阶段、记忆力和执行功能受损的人(N = 26)与没有任何已知脑功能风险的对照组中的成年人进行比较(N = 25)。在学习新单词对时,使用“生成并更正”和“只读”条件对学习技术进行比较。在测试中,两组的得分都超过了机会,并显示出生成和纠正(错误学习)的好处。BI组的贫困学习者从独立单词对学习任务中提取的“平坦”学习斜率中进行分类。至关重要的是,使用生成和正确的方法,较差的学习者没有表现出任何益处,但也没有减少学习。没有一个小组受到错误学习的伤害;除了最穷的学习者之外,所有人都从错误的学习中受益。这项研究表明,在一些康复环境中,鼓励客户猜测不熟悉材料的含义(例如,从卡片、杂志、报纸上),然后纠正他们的错误,可能对识别记忆有好处。确定错误学习何时以及如何有利于学习是未来研究的一个关键目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.40%
发文量
78
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuropsychological Rehabilitation publishes human experimental and clinical research related to rehabilitation, recovery of function, and brain plasticity. The journal is aimed at clinicians who wish to inform their practice in the light of the latest scientific research; at researchers in neurorehabilitation; and finally at researchers in cognitive neuroscience and related fields interested in the mechanisms of recovery and rehabilitation. Papers on neuropsychological assessment will be considered, and special topic reviews (2500-5000 words) addressing specific key questions in rehabilitation, recovery and brain plasticity will also be welcomed. The latter will enter a fast-track refereeing process.
期刊最新文献
SIFT IT: A feasibility and preliminary efficacy randomized controlled trial of a social cognition group treatment programme for people with acquired brain injury. Cognitive remediation in residential substance use treatment: A randomized stepped-wedge trial. Comparing high definition transcranial direct current stimulation to left temporoparietal junction and left inferior frontal gyrus for logopenic primary progressive aphasia: A single-case study. A qualitative study investigating the views of stroke survivors and their family members on discussing post-stroke cognitive trajectories. "Communicative competence assessment of the person with aphasia caregiver: Standardization of the ACCA-CHECKLIST".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1