Suppr超能文献

评估学习试验中的练习效应——是天花板效应还是其他的什么?

Evaluating practice effects across learning trials - ceiling effects or something more?

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Department of Neurology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2024 Sep;46(7):630-643. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2024.2400107. Epub 2024 Sep 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Practice effects (PE) are traditionally considered improvements in performance observed resulting from repeated exposure to test materials across multiple testing sessions. While PE are commonly observed for memory tests, this effect has only been considered in summary total scores. The current objective was to consider PE in summary total scores, individual learning trials, and learning slopes.

METHOD

One-week PE for individual trial and learning slope performance was examined on the BVMT-R and HVLT-R in 151 cognitively intact participants and 131 participants with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) aged 65 years and older.

RESULTS

One-week PE were observed across all trials and summary total scores for both memory measures and diagnostic classifications, despite the potential for ceiling effects to limit improvement on retesting. PE were largest on the first trial relative to subsequent learning trials. This effect was diminished - but not eliminated - in participants with MCI. Conversely, no PE were observed for learning slope scores, which was counter to expectations and likely confounded by ceiling effects.

CONCLUSIONS

PE were present across learning trials but not learning slopes, and the initial learning trial at follow-up tended to benefit most from PE relative to subsequent learning trials. Ceiling effects appeared to influence PE for learning slopes more than learning trials. These results highlight the potential diagnostic utility of PE across individual learning trials and inform how they are distributed at follow-up, while also suggesting that learning slopes may be generally stable during longitudinal assessment.

摘要

背景

实践效应(PE)通常被认为是由于在多次测试过程中反复接触测试材料而导致的表现提高。虽然在记忆测试中普遍观察到 PE,但这种效应仅在总结总分数中考虑。当前的目标是考虑总结总分数、个别学习试验和学习斜率中的 PE。

方法

在 151 名认知正常的参与者和 131 名年龄在 65 岁及以上的轻度认知障碍(MCI)参与者中,使用 BVMT-R 和 HVLT-R 检查了个别试验和学习斜率表现的一周 PE。

结果

尽管存在上限效应限制重测时的提高,但在所有试验和两个记忆测试及诊断分类的总结总分数中都观察到了一周的 PE。与随后的学习试验相比,PE 在第一个试验中最大。在 MCI 参与者中,这种效应减弱了-但并未消除。相反,学习斜率分数没有观察到 PE,这与预期相反,可能与上限效应有关。

结论

PE 存在于学习试验中,但不存在于学习斜率中,在随访时,后续学习试验相对第一个学习试验更容易受到 PE 的影响。上限效应似乎对学习斜率的 PE 影响大于学习试验。这些结果突出了 PE 在个别学习试验中的潜在诊断效用,并告知了它们在随访时的分布情况,同时还表明在纵向评估期间学习斜率可能普遍稳定。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

6
Lecanemab: Appropriate Use Recommendations.仑卡奈单抗:合理使用建议。
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2023;10(3):362-377. doi: 10.14283/jpad.2023.30.
7
Learning slopes in early-onset Alzheimer's disease.早发性阿尔茨海默病中的学习斜率。
Alzheimers Dement. 2023 Nov;19 Suppl 9(Suppl 9):S19-S28. doi: 10.1002/alz.13159. Epub 2023 May 27.
10
Global cognitive trajectory patterns in Alzheimer's disease.阿尔茨海默病的全球认知轨迹模式。
Int Psychogeriatr. 2024 Mar;36(3):200-209. doi: 10.1017/S1041610222000047. Epub 2022 Mar 25.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验