如果→朗读中的虚词:阿尔茨海默病风险的新标志。

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-04 DOI:10.1037/neu0000829
Tamar H Gollan, Alena Stasenko, Chuchu Li, Denis S Smirnov, Douglas Galasko, David P Salmon
{"title":"如果→朗读中的虚词:阿尔茨海默病风险的新标志。","authors":"Tamar H Gollan, Alena Stasenko, Chuchu Li, Denis S Smirnov, Douglas Galasko, David P Salmon","doi":"10.1037/neu0000829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying the ability to stop \"autocorrect\" errors elicited by unexpected words in a read-aloud task, and the utility of autocorrection for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cognitively normal participants (total <i>n</i> = 85; <i>n</i> = 64 with cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] biomarkers) read aloud six short paragraphs in which 10 critical target words were replaced with autocorrect targets, for example, <i>The player who scored that final [paint] for the local team reported [him] experience</i>. Autocorrect targets either replaced the most expected/<i>dominant</i> completion (i.e., <i>point</i>) or a less expected/<i>nondominant</i> completion (i.e., <i>basket</i>), and within each paragraph half of the autocorrect targets were content words (e.g., <i>point/paint</i>) and half were function words (e.g., <i>his/him</i>). Participants were instructed to avoid autocorrecting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants produced more autocorrect errors in paragraphs with dominant than with nondominant targets, and with function than with content targets. Cognitively normal participants with high CSF Tau/Aβ42 (i.e., an AD-like biomarker profile) produced more autocorrect total errors than those below the Tau/Aβ42 threshold, an effect also significant with dominant-function targets alone (e.g., saying <i>his</i> instead of <i>him</i>). A logistic regression model with dominant-function errors and age showed errors as the stronger predictor of biomarker status (sensitivity 83%; specificity 85%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Difficulty stopping autocorrect errors is associated with biomarkers indicating preclinical AD, and reveals promise as a diagnostic tool. Greater vulnerability of function over content words to autocorrection in individuals with AD-like biomarkers implicates monitoring and attention (rather than semantic processing) in the earliest of cognitive changes associated with AD risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":19205,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9898462/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Autocorrection if→of function words in reading aloud: A novel marker of Alzheimer's risk.\",\"authors\":\"Tamar H Gollan, Alena Stasenko, Chuchu Li, Denis S Smirnov, Douglas Galasko, David P Salmon\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/neu0000829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying the ability to stop \\\"autocorrect\\\" errors elicited by unexpected words in a read-aloud task, and the utility of autocorrection for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cognitively normal participants (total <i>n</i> = 85; <i>n</i> = 64 with cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] biomarkers) read aloud six short paragraphs in which 10 critical target words were replaced with autocorrect targets, for example, <i>The player who scored that final [paint] for the local team reported [him] experience</i>. Autocorrect targets either replaced the most expected/<i>dominant</i> completion (i.e., <i>point</i>) or a less expected/<i>nondominant</i> completion (i.e., <i>basket</i>), and within each paragraph half of the autocorrect targets were content words (e.g., <i>point/paint</i>) and half were function words (e.g., <i>his/him</i>). Participants were instructed to avoid autocorrecting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants produced more autocorrect errors in paragraphs with dominant than with nondominant targets, and with function than with content targets. Cognitively normal participants with high CSF Tau/Aβ42 (i.e., an AD-like biomarker profile) produced more autocorrect total errors than those below the Tau/Aβ42 threshold, an effect also significant with dominant-function targets alone (e.g., saying <i>his</i> instead of <i>him</i>). A logistic regression model with dominant-function errors and age showed errors as the stronger predictor of biomarker status (sensitivity 83%; specificity 85%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Difficulty stopping autocorrect errors is associated with biomarkers indicating preclinical AD, and reveals promise as a diagnostic tool. Greater vulnerability of function over content words to autocorrection in individuals with AD-like biomarkers implicates monitoring and attention (rather than semantic processing) in the earliest of cognitive changes associated with AD risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9898462/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000829\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000829","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究探讨了在朗读任务中阻止意外单词引发的“自校正”错误的认知机制,以及自校正在预测阿尔茨海默病(AD)生物标志物中的效用。方法:认知正常的参与者(总共n=85;n=64,具有脑脊液[CFS]生物标志物)大声朗读六个简短的段落,其中10个关键的目标词被自动更正的目标词取代,例如,为当地球队获得最后[油漆]的球员报告了[他]的经历。自动更正目标要么取代了最期望/占主导地位的完成(即点),要么取代了不太期望/非占主导地位完成(即篮子),在每一段中,一半的自动更正目标是内容词(如点/油漆),一半是功能词(如他/他)。参与者被要求避免自我更正。结果:参与者在具有显性目标的段落中产生的自校正错误多于非显性目标的,在具有功能的段落中则多于具有内容目标的段落。具有高CSF Tau/Aβ42(即AD样生物标志物图谱)的认知正常参与者产生的自校正总误差比低于Tau/Aα42阈值的参与者更多,这种影响在单独使用显性功能靶点时也很显著(例如,说他而不是他)。具有显性功能误差和年龄的逻辑回归模型显示,误差是生物标志物状态的更强预测因子(敏感性83%;特异性85%)。结论:难以阻止自校正误差与指示临床前AD的生物标志物有关,并显示出作为诊断工具的前景。在具有AD样生物标志物的个体中,功能比内容词更容易受到自校正的影响,这意味着在与AD风险相关的最早认知变化中进行监测和关注(而不是语义处理)。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Autocorrection if→of function words in reading aloud: A novel marker of Alzheimer's risk.

Objective: The present study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying the ability to stop "autocorrect" errors elicited by unexpected words in a read-aloud task, and the utility of autocorrection for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers.

Method: Cognitively normal participants (total n = 85; n = 64 with cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] biomarkers) read aloud six short paragraphs in which 10 critical target words were replaced with autocorrect targets, for example, The player who scored that final [paint] for the local team reported [him] experience. Autocorrect targets either replaced the most expected/dominant completion (i.e., point) or a less expected/nondominant completion (i.e., basket), and within each paragraph half of the autocorrect targets were content words (e.g., point/paint) and half were function words (e.g., his/him). Participants were instructed to avoid autocorrecting.

Results: Participants produced more autocorrect errors in paragraphs with dominant than with nondominant targets, and with function than with content targets. Cognitively normal participants with high CSF Tau/Aβ42 (i.e., an AD-like biomarker profile) produced more autocorrect total errors than those below the Tau/Aβ42 threshold, an effect also significant with dominant-function targets alone (e.g., saying his instead of him). A logistic regression model with dominant-function errors and age showed errors as the stronger predictor of biomarker status (sensitivity 83%; specificity 85%).

Conclusions: Difficulty stopping autocorrect errors is associated with biomarkers indicating preclinical AD, and reveals promise as a diagnostic tool. Greater vulnerability of function over content words to autocorrection in individuals with AD-like biomarkers implicates monitoring and attention (rather than semantic processing) in the earliest of cognitive changes associated with AD risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology
Neuropsychology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology publishes original, empirical research; systematic reviews and meta-analyses; and theoretical articles on the relation between brain and human cognitive, emotional, and behavioral function.
期刊最新文献
Language lateralization in temporal lobe epilepsy: A behavioral screening tool for surgical planning. Intrasubject variability of sustained attention is associated with elevated self-reported attention deficits in women with a fragile X premutation allele. The memory binding test in a longitudinal study of cognitive aging and preclinical disease. Algorithm-defined memory impairment in older American Indians: The Strong Heart Study. Childhood motor difficulties and cognitive impairment in midlife: A 40-year cohort study.
×
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