Technological memory aids for people with memory deficits

This paper reviews the application of external memory aids and computer-based procedures for the enhancement of memory functioning in neurological patients particularly adults with non-progressive brain injury and those with mild/moderate memory deficits. Memory aids may function as event memory aids to improve prospective memory functioning (Herrmann et al., 1999), or as knowledge memory aids to facilitate the acquisition and utilisation of factual information. We review the range of available external memory aids and evidence on their efficacy in clinical settings. Several studies have shown that external memory aids act as effective reminders and improve prospective memory functioning. Computer-based resources and procedures for improving memory functioning include those that serve similar functions to external memory aids, those which present memory tasks as memory retraining exercises, those which instruct the individual in the use of memory strategies, those which directly assist in domain-specific knowledge acquisition, and those which form the basis of "virtual reality" memory rehabilitation procedures. While there may be potential for computer-based procedures, there is at present only limited evidence on their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. We outline practical issues relating to the implementation of memory aids in clinical settings. We consider future developments that may impact on the application of external memory aids and computers in the treatment of human memory disorder

Episodic Memory and Executive Function Are Differentially Affected by Retests but Similarly Affected by Age in a Longitudinal Study of Normally-Aging Older Adults

Episodic memory and executive function are two cognitive domains that have been studied extensively in older adults and have been shown to decline in normally-aging older individuals. However, one of the problems with characterizing cognitive changes in longitudinal studies has been separating effects attributable to normal aging from effects created by repeated testing or practice. In the present study, 166 people aged 65 and older were enrolled over several years and tested at least 3 times at variable intervals (M = 3.2 yrs). The cognitive measures were composite scores. Each composite was made up of five neuropsychological tests, previously identified through factor analysis. For one pair of composite scores, variance attributable to age was removed from each subtest through regression analyses before z-scores were computed, creating two age-corrected composites. A second pair of composites were not age-corrected. Using linear mixed-effects models, we first explored retest effects for each cognitive domain, independent of age, using the age-corrected composites. We then modeled aging effects using the age-uncorrected composites after subtracting out retest effects. Results indicated significant retest effects for memory but not for executive function, such that memory performance improved across the three testing sessions. When these practice effects were removed from the age-uncorrected data, effects of aging were evident for both executive and memory function with significant declines over time. We also explored several individual difference variables including sex, IQ, and age at the initial testing session and across time. Although sex and IQ affected performance on both cognitive factors at the initial test, neither was related to practice effects, although young-older adults tended to benefit from practice to a greater extent than old-older adults. In addition, people with higher IQs showed slower age-related declines in memory, but no advantages in executive function. These findings suggest that (a) aging affects both memory and executive function similarly, (b) higher IQ, possibly reflecting cognitive reserve, may slow age-related declines in memory, and (c) practice through repeated testing enhances performance in memory particularly in younger-older adults, and may therefore mask aging effects if not taken into account. Copyright © 2022 Glisky, Woolverton, McVeigh and Grilli.Open access journalThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]