{"title":"不同模式下工作记忆的衰老过程","authors":"Ohad Levi, Eyal Heled","doi":"10.3390/neurolint16050084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Working memory (WM) involves temporarily storing and manipulating information. Research on the impact of aging on WM has shown inconsistent results regarding the decline in visual and verbal WM, with a lack of studies on tactile WM. This study aimed to assess the effects of aging on WM across verbal, visuospatial, and tactile modalities using span tasks of forward (storage) and backward (manipulation) stages. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 130 participants, divided into four age groups of 20-29, 60-69, 70-79, and 80-89, completed the Digit, Visuospatial, and Tactual Spans. Performance was analyzed using a 3 (Task) × 4 (Group) × 2 (Stage) mixed design repeated measures ANOVA. <b>Results</b>: The analysis revealed significant main effects for modality (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.15), age (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.48), and stage (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.30). Digit Span outperformed the other modalities, while Tactual Span showed the worst performance. Additionally, task performance declined with age, and the forward stage was superior to the backward stage. Interaction effects indicated that Digit Span was less affected by aging compared to the Visuospatial and Tactual Spans (<i>p</i> = 0.004, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.07). Post hoc analyses further revealed that the Digit Span consistently outperformed the other modalities in both stages, with more pronounced differences observed in the forward stage. <b>Conclusions</b>: Verbal WM is more resilient to aging compared to the other modalities while tactile WM declines with age in a manner similar to verbal and visuospatial WM, suggesting a modality-specific impact of aging on WM.</p>","PeriodicalId":19130,"journal":{"name":"Neurology International","volume":"16 5","pages":"1122-1131"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11510651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aging Processes of Working Memory in Different Modalities.\",\"authors\":\"Ohad Levi, Eyal Heled\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/neurolint16050084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Working memory (WM) involves temporarily storing and manipulating information. Research on the impact of aging on WM has shown inconsistent results regarding the decline in visual and verbal WM, with a lack of studies on tactile WM. This study aimed to assess the effects of aging on WM across verbal, visuospatial, and tactile modalities using span tasks of forward (storage) and backward (manipulation) stages. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 130 participants, divided into four age groups of 20-29, 60-69, 70-79, and 80-89, completed the Digit, Visuospatial, and Tactual Spans. Performance was analyzed using a 3 (Task) × 4 (Group) × 2 (Stage) mixed design repeated measures ANOVA. <b>Results</b>: The analysis revealed significant main effects for modality (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.15), age (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.48), and stage (<i>p</i> < 0.001, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.30). Digit Span outperformed the other modalities, while Tactual Span showed the worst performance. Additionally, task performance declined with age, and the forward stage was superior to the backward stage. Interaction effects indicated that Digit Span was less affected by aging compared to the Visuospatial and Tactual Spans (<i>p</i> = 0.004, η<sub>p</sub><sup>2</sup> = 0.07). Post hoc analyses further revealed that the Digit Span consistently outperformed the other modalities in both stages, with more pronounced differences observed in the forward stage. <b>Conclusions</b>: Verbal WM is more resilient to aging compared to the other modalities while tactile WM declines with age in a manner similar to verbal and visuospatial WM, suggesting a modality-specific impact of aging on WM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19130,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology International\",\"volume\":\"16 5\",\"pages\":\"1122-1131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11510651/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint16050084\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint16050084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Aging Processes of Working Memory in Different Modalities.
Background: Working memory (WM) involves temporarily storing and manipulating information. Research on the impact of aging on WM has shown inconsistent results regarding the decline in visual and verbal WM, with a lack of studies on tactile WM. This study aimed to assess the effects of aging on WM across verbal, visuospatial, and tactile modalities using span tasks of forward (storage) and backward (manipulation) stages. Methods: A total of 130 participants, divided into four age groups of 20-29, 60-69, 70-79, and 80-89, completed the Digit, Visuospatial, and Tactual Spans. Performance was analyzed using a 3 (Task) × 4 (Group) × 2 (Stage) mixed design repeated measures ANOVA. Results: The analysis revealed significant main effects for modality (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.15), age (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.48), and stage (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.30). Digit Span outperformed the other modalities, while Tactual Span showed the worst performance. Additionally, task performance declined with age, and the forward stage was superior to the backward stage. Interaction effects indicated that Digit Span was less affected by aging compared to the Visuospatial and Tactual Spans (p = 0.004, ηp2 = 0.07). Post hoc analyses further revealed that the Digit Span consistently outperformed the other modalities in both stages, with more pronounced differences observed in the forward stage. Conclusions: Verbal WM is more resilient to aging compared to the other modalities while tactile WM declines with age in a manner similar to verbal and visuospatial WM, suggesting a modality-specific impact of aging on WM.