跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT05672771
NCT05672771已完成不适用

The Effects of Mixed Working Memory Training on Subsequent Training Gains Among Older Adults

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign2 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 90 人开始时间: 2020年8月26日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
入组人数
90
试验地点
2
主要终点
Change in Reading Span

研究概览

简要总结

While an intellectually active and socially integrated lifestyle shows promise for promoting cognitive resilience, the mechanisms underlying any such effects are not well understood. The aim of the current project is test the implications of the "mutualism" hypothesis, which suggests that intellectual function emerges out of the reciprocal influence of growth in abilities as they are exercised in the ecology of everyday life. Such a view implies that improvement in one component will enhance the modifiability of a related component. An additional aim was to test the idea that mutualistic effects will be enhanced by more diverse training in related skills, such as interleaved training of multiple skills, relative to single-component training.

A "successive-enrichment" paradigm was developed to test this with working memory (WM) as the target for training given its centrality in models of attention, intellectual function, and everyday capacities such as reasoning and language comprehension. All participants receive the same target training, but the nature of the training that precedes it is manipulated. Outcome measures include pre- to posttest gains in working memory and episodic memory, as well as the rate of gain in learning the target task. The principle of enhanced mutualism would predict that more diverse experiences related to the target skill will enhance efficiency in acquiring the target skill.

详细描述

Within conventional assessments of transfer that examine the effects of training on measures of function at a single time point, these ideas has not been tested. In this project, a "successive-enrichment" paradigm was used to examine improvement in cognitive skills as a function of different conditions for earlier training. The target for training is working memory (WM) given its centrality in models of attention, intellectual function, and everyday capacities such as reasoning and language comprehension.

In the successive-enrichment paradigm, all participants receive the same target training, but the nature of the training that precedes it is manipulated. Thus, in Phase 2, all participants are trained for 10 days on the reading span task (RdgS), in which the task is to verify sensibility in a set of sentences and retain in memory an alphabetic character presented after each sentence. The set size adapts to the participant's skill (in both accuracy of sensibility decisions and memory for the letter set). In Phase 1, participants are randomly assigned to one of four groups designed to test the assumption that related and diverse experiences with the target skill differentially enhance the rate of learning the new skill. In the Same Task (ST) control, participants train on the RdgS, and were expected to be at ceiling in Phase 2. In the Different Single condition (DS), participants trained on a WM task different from that in Phase 1 (the lexical decision span). In the Different Mixed (DM) condition, participants trained on two different interleaved WM tasks, the lexical decision span and the category span. In the non-WM Placebo Control (PC), participants train on a speeded lexical decision task (matched in materials and verbal decision component to the lexical decision span the but requiring no simultaneous memory.

Outcome measures include pre- to posttest gains in working memory and episodic memory, as well as the rate of gain in learning the RdgS in Phase 2. The PC and ST controls define the lower and upper limits of performance, respectively. The principle of enhanced mutualism would predict that the DM group will show more efficient learning of the RdgS in Phase 2 than the DS group, which will both show more efficient learning than the PC group.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Factorial
主要目的
Basic Science
盲法
Single (Participant)

入排标准

年龄范围
60 Years 至 90 Years(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Native English speakers or acquisition of English before age 6 yrs old
  • Self-report of hearing ability sufficient to engage with lab personnel
  • No stroke in the last 3 years
  • No current cancer treatment involving radiation or chemotherapy - No self-reported learning disability
  • No self-reported psychiatric disorder
  • Willingness to be randomly assigned to training conditions
  • No plans that would limit participation during the activity period
  • No participation in a cognitive intervention program in the last year
  • No additional Exclusion Criteria.

排除标准

  • 未提供

研究组 & 干预措施

Non-WM Placebo Control (PC)

Placebo Comparator

Training in a speeded Lexical Decision task only (which has no memory component) in Phase 1 prior to Phase 2 training in WM.

干预措施: Non-WM Placebo Control (PC) (Behavioral)

Different Mixed Condition (DM)

Experimental

Training in both Lexical Decision Span and Category Span in Phase 1 (which are both different from the target task Reading Span in Phase 2).

干预措施: Different Mixed Condition (DM) (Behavioral)

Different Single Condition (DS)

Experimental

Training in the Lexical Decision Span in Phase 1 (which is different from the target task Reading Span in Phase 2).

干预措施: Different Single Condition (DS) (Behavioral)

Same Task (ST) Practice Control

Active Comparator

Training in Reading Span task in Phase 1 (which is the same as target task in Phase 2).

干预措施: Same Task (ST) Practice Control (Behavioral)

结局指标

主要结局

Change in Reading Span

时间窗: Change from Baseline to 5-6 weeks after pretest

Change in Reading Span score from pre- to posttest in z-score units ("standard unit change"). The change in z-score units was calculated \[(posttest score - pretest score) / standard deviation of the scores at pretest)\]. A z-score of 0 represents no change from pretest to posttest; the unit is the standard deviations of the sample at pretest (e.g., a score 0.5 would indicate a half standard deviation improvement in overall working memory). There is no agreed upon standard of clinical significance for improvement in working memory

Change in Overall Working Memory

时间窗: Change from baseline to 5-6 wks after pretest

Average change in working memory from pre- to posttest in z-score units ("standard unit change"). For each working memory measure (Reading Span, Lexical Decision Span, Category Span, Operation Span, and Count Span), the change in z-score units was calculated \[(posttest score - pretest score) / standard deviation of the scores at pretest)\]. The score reported is the mean of these 5 values. A z-score of 0 represents no change from pretest to posttest; the unit is the standard deviations of the sample at pretest (e.g., a score 0.5 would indicate a half standard deviation improvement in overall working memory). There is no agreed upon standard of clinical significance for improvement in working memory

次要结局

  • Training Gains on the Reading Span Task in Phase 2(2 weeks)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

Elizabeth A L Stine-Morrow

Professor Emerita

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

研究点 (2)

Loading locations...

相似试验