The Effects of Mixed Working Memory Training on Subsequent Training Gains Among Older Adults
NCT ID: NCT05672771
Last Updated: 2024-03-28
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
90 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2020-08-26
2022-01-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
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.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Dual-task Training for Function in MCI
NCT04059705
Working Memory and Physical Exercise Training in Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment
NCT05948930
An Intergenerational, Cognitively Enriched Intervention for MCI Patients and Their Children.
NCT06221579
Non-pharmacological Interventions on Cognitive Functions in Older People With Mild Cognitive Impairment
NCT03545152
Effects of Combined Physical-cognitive Training on Cognitive Function in MCI
NCT03805620
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
FACTORIAL
BASIC_SCIENCE
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Different Mixed Condition (DM)
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).
Different Mixed Condition (DM)
Participants engage in home-based training on two working memory tasks, both different from those in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Different Single Condition (DS)
Training in the Lexical Decision Span in Phase 1 (which is different from the target task Reading Span in Phase 2).
Different Single Condition (DS)
Participants engage in home-based training on a working memory task that is different from that in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Same Task (ST) Practice Control
Training in Reading Span task in Phase 1 (which is the same as target task in Phase 2).
Same Task (ST) Practice Control
Participants engage in home-based training on the exact same working memory tasks as that in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Non-WM Placebo Control (PC)
Training in a speeded Lexical Decision task only (which has no memory component) in Phase 1 prior to Phase 2 training in WM.
Non-WM Placebo Control (PC)
Participants engage in home-based training on speeded verbal decision, which unlike the target task training, has no memory component. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Different Mixed Condition (DM)
Participants engage in home-based training on two working memory tasks, both different from those in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Different Single Condition (DS)
Participants engage in home-based training on a working memory task that is different from that in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Same Task (ST) Practice Control
Participants engage in home-based training on the exact same working memory tasks as that in the target task training. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Non-WM Placebo Control (PC)
Participants engage in home-based training on speeded verbal decision, which unlike the target task training, has no memory component. Goal is 10 days of training, with 4 8-min blocks of training each day.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* 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
60 Years
90 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
NIH
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Elizabeth A L Stine-Morrow
Professor Emerita
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Elizabeth A L Stine-Morrow, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Illinois at Chicago
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Beckman Institute
Urbana, Illinois, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Stine-Morrow EAL, Payne BR, Roberts BW, Kramer AF, Morrow DG, Payne L, Hill PL, Jackson JJ, Gao X, Noh SR, Janke MC, Parisi JM. Training versus engagement as paths to cognitive enrichment with aging. Psychol Aging. 2014 Dec;29(4):891-906. doi: 10.1037/a0038244. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
Payne BR, Stine-Morrow EAL. The Effects of Home-Based Cognitive Training on Verbal Working Memory and Language Comprehension in Older Adulthood. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017 Aug 8;9:256. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00256. eCollection 2017.
Savi AO, Marsman M, van der Maas HLJ, Maris GKJ. The Wiring of Intelligence. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Nov;14(6):1034-1061. doi: 10.1177/1745691619866447. Epub 2019 Oct 24.
van der Maas HL, Dolan CV, Grasman RP, Wicherts JM, Huizenga HM, Raijmakers ME. A dynamical model of general intelligence: the positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychol Rev. 2006 Oct;113(4):842-61. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.842.
Van Der Maas HLJ, Kan KJ, Marsman M, Stevenson CE. Network Models for Cognitive Development and Intelligence. J Intell. 2017 Apr 20;5(2):16. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence5020016.
Daneman M, Merikle PM. Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Dec;3(4):422-33. doi: 10.3758/BF03214546.
Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., & Manavbasi, I. (2022). Beyond "Use It or Lose It": The impact of engagement on cognitive aging. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 4, 319-352.
Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. Harvard University Press.
Engle RW, Tuholski SW, Laughlin JE, Conway ARA. Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999 Sep;128(3):309-331. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.128.3.309.
Conway AR, Kane MJ, Bunting MF, Hambrick DZ, Wilhelm O, Engle RW. Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user's guide. Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Oct;12(5):769-86. doi: 10.3758/bf03196772.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, and Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Mixed Working Memory Training
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.