Learning and vulnerability to phonological and semantic interference in normal aging: an experimental study.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2022.2154366
M-J Chasles, S Joubert, J Cole, E Delage, I Et Rouleau
{"title":"Learning and vulnerability to phonological and semantic interference in normal aging: an experimental study.","authors":"M-J Chasles,&nbsp;S Joubert,&nbsp;J Cole,&nbsp;E Delage,&nbsp;I Et Rouleau","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2022.2154366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>ABSTRACT</b>This study compares semantic and phonological interference vulnerability across the full range of learning processes. <b>Method</b>: 43 controls aged 61-88 underwent a neuropsychological examination, French adaptation of the LASSI-L, and an experimental phonological test, the TIP-A. Paired sample <i>t</i>-tests, factorial ANOVA and hierarchical regressions were conducted, psychometric properties were calculated. <b>Results</b>: TIP-A efficiently generated phonological interference between concurrent word lists and was associated with short-term memory, unlike LASSI-L. On LASSI-L, proactive interference was higher than retroactive interference; the opposite pattern was found on TIP-A. Memory performance was better explained by age in the semantic than in the phonological task. Age was not associated with interference vulnerability. Intrusions and false recognition were associated with cognitive functioning regardless of age, particularly in the semantic context. <b>Conclusion</b>: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess phonological and semantic interference using homologous concurrent word list tasks, and not a working memory build-up or DRM paradigm. The pattern obtained illustrates the weak initial memory trace in a phonological context and results are discussed according to depth-of-processing and dual-process theories. Similar paradigms could be studied among various pathologies for a better understanding of generalised interference vulnerability vs. specific semantic or phonological impairment.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":"31 2","pages":"297-314"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2154366","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis study compares semantic and phonological interference vulnerability across the full range of learning processes. Method: 43 controls aged 61-88 underwent a neuropsychological examination, French adaptation of the LASSI-L, and an experimental phonological test, the TIP-A. Paired sample t-tests, factorial ANOVA and hierarchical regressions were conducted, psychometric properties were calculated. Results: TIP-A efficiently generated phonological interference between concurrent word lists and was associated with short-term memory, unlike LASSI-L. On LASSI-L, proactive interference was higher than retroactive interference; the opposite pattern was found on TIP-A. Memory performance was better explained by age in the semantic than in the phonological task. Age was not associated with interference vulnerability. Intrusions and false recognition were associated with cognitive functioning regardless of age, particularly in the semantic context. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess phonological and semantic interference using homologous concurrent word list tasks, and not a working memory build-up or DRM paradigm. The pattern obtained illustrates the weak initial memory trace in a phonological context and results are discussed according to depth-of-processing and dual-process theories. Similar paradigms could be studied among various pathologies for a better understanding of generalised interference vulnerability vs. specific semantic or phonological impairment.

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
正常衰老过程中语音和语义干扰的学习和脆弱性:一项实验研究。
摘要本研究比较了全范围学习过程中语义和语音干扰的脆弱性。方法:对照组43例,年龄61-88岁,接受神经心理检查、法语LASSI-L改编和实验性语音测试TIP-A。进行配对样本t检验、因子方差分析和层次回归,计算心理测量特性。结果:与lasi - l不同,TIP-A有效地在并发词表之间产生语音干扰,并与短期记忆有关。在lasi - l上,主动干扰大于追溯干扰;在TIP-A上发现了相反的模式。在语义任务中,年龄比在语音任务中更能解释记忆表现。年龄与干扰易损性无关。入侵和错误识别与认知功能有关,与年龄无关,特别是在语义环境中。结论:据我们所知,这是第一个使用同源并发单词列表任务来评估语音和语义干扰的研究,而不是使用工作记忆构建或DRM范式。该模式说明了语音环境下弱的初始记忆痕迹,并根据加工深度理论和双加工理论对结果进行了讨论。类似的范式可以在不同的病理中进行研究,以更好地理解广义干扰脆弱性与特定的语义或语音障碍。
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
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of the Closure and Resolution Scale (CRS). People experience similar intrusions about past and future autobiographical negative experiences. Comparison of working memory performance in athletes and non-athletes: a meta-analysis of behavioural studies. On the role of familiarity and developmental exposure in music-evoked autobiographical memories. Intrinsic functional connectivity in medial temporal lobe networks is associated with susceptibility to misinformation.
×
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