Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehaviroal Sciences at the David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA , Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University , Bangkok, Thailand.
Exp Aging Res. 2021 Mar-Apr;47(2):131-144. doi: 10.1080/0361073X.2020.1861841. Epub 2020 Dec 26.
: To study whether memory control beliefs predict response to memory training, or change as a result of participating in memory training. : Eighty community based participants with subjective memory complaints Community-based study at UCLA were randomized to one of three conditions: , the program consisted of weekly 120-minute classes featuring instruction in three specific strategies: Method of Loci; Chunking Technique; and Face-Name Association, or over seven weeks. All participants underwent pre- and 1-week post-intervention follow-up memory testing for recalling word lists (in serial order and any order) and face-name pairs. Memory control beliefs were assessed at baseline and follow-up using the Memory Controllability Inventory, which consists of four subscales; Present Ability; Potential Improvement; Effort Utility; and Inevitable Decrement. : Sixty-three participants (mean age [SD] 68.3 [6.7] years) were included in the analysis. ANCOVA revealed significant group differences in the Present Ability subscale, F = 4.93, =.01. Participants in the Memory Training group significantly improved on the Present Ability subscale compared to the Health Education group (mean difference =.96, SE =.31, =.003, effect size = 0.93). From regression analyses, baseline Memory Controllability Inventory subscales did not significantly predict memory performance after memory training. : Baseline memory control beliefs did not predict memory performance following the intervention, but participating in memory training enhanced memory control beliefs about current memory function. These results suggest that participating in memory training can enhance confidence in one's memory ability.
: 研究记忆控制信念是否可以预测记忆训练的反应，或者是否会因参与记忆训练而发生变化。: 在加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校进行的一项基于社区的研究中，80 名有主观记忆抱怨的社区参与者被随机分配到以下三种条件之一：记忆训练组、健康教育组或对照组。记忆训练组的方案包括每周 120 分钟的课程，重点教授三种特定策略：位置法；分组技术；面部-姓名联想。在七周内完成。所有参与者在干预前和干预后一周进行记忆测试，测试内容包括按顺序和任意顺序回忆单词列表和面部-姓名对。在基线和随访时使用记忆可控性量表评估记忆控制信念，该量表由四个分量表组成：当前能力；潜在改进；努力效用；不可避免的下降。: 共有 63 名参与者（平均年龄[标准差]为 68.3[6.7]岁）纳入分析。方差分析显示，当前能力分量表存在显著的组间差异，F=4.93，p=0.01。与健康教育组相比，记忆训练组在当前能力分量表上的得分显著提高（平均差异=0.96，SE=0.31，p=0.003，效应量=0.93）。回归分析显示，基线记忆可控性量表分量表不能显著预测记忆训练后的记忆表现。: 基线记忆控制信念不能预测干预后的记忆表现，但参与记忆训练可以增强对当前记忆功能的记忆控制信念。这些结果表明，参与记忆训练可以增强对自己记忆能力的信心。
