Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:40:30.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improvement of age-related memory deficits by differential outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2009

Ginesa López-Crespo ,
Victoria Plaza ,
Luis J. Fuentes  and
Angeles F. Estévez
Ginesa López-Crespo*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Psicología Básica y Metodología, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Victoria Plaza
Affiliation:
Departamento de Psicología Básica y Metodología, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Luis J. Fuentes
Affiliation:
Departamento de Psicología Básica y Metodología, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Angeles F. Estévez
Affiliation:
Departamento de Neurociencia y Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Almería, Spain
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Dr. Ginesa López-Crespo, Dpto. Psicología Básica y Metodología, Facultad de Psicología, Campus de Espinardo, Universidad de Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain. Phone: +34 968 398481; Fax: +34 968 398161. Email: ginesa.lopez.crespo@um.es.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: The differential outcomes procedure (DOP) has proved useful to improve discrimination learning in both animals and humans. Here we adapted DOP to assess its utility to overcome the memory loss commonly associated with normal aging.

Methods: In a delayed matching-to-sample task, subjects were exposed to a man's face, and after a delay, they were required to decide if the previously seen face was within a set of six men's faces. For half the subjects, each sample face was paired with its own outcome (differential outcomes condition); outcomes were randomly arranged for the remaining half of subjects (non-differential condition). Either short (5 second) or long (30 second) delays were interposed between the sample and the comparison stimuli.

Results: Results showed that relative to younger adults, older adults' performance decreased with the longer delay. However, the use of differential outcomes was able to reverse the detrimental effect of the increased delay in the elderly group, raising their performance to the level shown by younger adults.

Conclusions: These findings demonstrate, for the first time, that DOP can help elderly people overcome their memory limitations, and they draw attention to the potential of this procedure as a therapeutic technique.

Keywords

agingdifferential outcomes effectmemorytherapeutic aid
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 503 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bartlett, J. C., Leslie, J. E., Tubbs, A. and Fulton, A. (1989). Aging and memory for pictures of faces. Psychology and Aging, 4, 276–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brodigan, D. L. and Peterson, G. B. (1976). Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy, prechoice delay and domesticity. Animal Learning and Behavior, 4, 121–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craik, F. M., Morris, L. W., Morris, R. G. and Loewen, E. R. (1990). Relations between source amnesia and frontal lobe functioning in older adults. Psychology of Aging, 5, 148–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estévez, A. F. and Fuentes, L. J. (2003). Differential outcomes effect in four-year-old children. Psicológica, 24, 159–167.Google Scholar
Estévez, A. F., Fuentes, L. J., Mari-Beffa, P. and Álvarez, D. (2001). The differential outcomes effect as a useful tool to improve conditional discrimination learning in children. Learning and Motivation, 1, 48–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estévez, A. F., Fuentes, L. J., Overmier, J. B. and González, C. (2003a). Differential outcomes effect in children and adults with Down syndrome. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 108, 108–116.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estévez, A. F., Overmier, J. B. and Fuentes, L. J. (2003b). Differential outcomes effect in children: demonstration and mechanisms. Learning and Motivation, 34, 148–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estévez, A. F., Vivas, A. B., Alonso, D., Marí-Beffa, P., Fuentes, L. J. and Overmier, J. B. (2007). Enhancing challenged students' recognition of mathematical relations through differential outcomes training. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 571–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flicker, C., Bartus, R. T., Crook, T. H. and Ferris, S. H. (1984). Effects of aging and dementia upon recent visuospatial memory.Neurobiology of Aging, 5, 275–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedden, T. and Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2004). Insights into the ageing mind: a view from cognitive neuroscience. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 5, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hochhalter, A. K., Sweeney, W. A., Bakke, B. L., Holub, R. J. and Overmier, J. B. (2000). Improving face recognition in alcohol dementia. Clinical Gerontologist, 22, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goeters, S., Blakely, F. and Poling, A. (1992). The differential outcomes effect. Psychological Record, 42, 389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, C. and Guess, D. (1978). Use of function as a consequence in training receptive labeling to severely and profoundly retarded individuals. American Association for the Education of the Severely/Profoundly Handicapped (AAESPH) Review, 3, 246–258.Google Scholar
Joseph, B., Overmier, J. B. and Thompson, T. (1997). Food and nonfood related differential outcomes in equivalence learning by adults with Prader–Willi syndrome. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 4, 374–386.Google Scholar
Linwick, D., Ovemier, J. B., Peterson, G. B. and Mertens, M. (1988). Interaction of memories and expectancies as mediators of choice behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 101, 313–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Litt, M. D. and Schreibman, L. (1981). Stimulus-specific reinforcement in the acquisition of receptive labels by autistic children. Analysis and Intervention in Disabilities, 1, 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maki, P., Overmier, J. B., Delos, S. and Gutman, A. J. (1995). Expectancies as factors influencing conditional discrimination performance of children. Psychological Record, 45, 45–71.Google Scholar
Miller, O. T., Waugh, K. M. and Chambers, K. (2002). Differential outcomes effect: increased accuracy in adults learning Kanji with stimulus specific rewards. Psychological Record, 52, 315–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mok, L. W. and Overmier, J. B. (2007). Outcome-specific expectancies are effective in mediating choice behavior in normal human adults, too: a novel with-in-subjects demonstration of the differential outcomes effect. Psychological Record, 57, 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moscovitch, M. and Winocur, G. (1995). Frontal lobes, memory, and aging. In Grafman, J., Holyoak, K. J. and Boller, B. (eds.), Structure and Functions of the Human Prefrontal Cortex (pp. 119–150). New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Overmier, J. B., Savage, L. M. and Sweeney, W. A. (1999). Behavioral and pharmacological analyses of memory: new behavioral options for remediation. In Haug, M. and Whalen, R. E. (eds.), Animal Models of Human Emotion and Cognition (pp. 231–245). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, L. M. (2001). In search of the neurobiological correlates of the differential outcomes effect. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 36, 182–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savage, L. M. and Langlais, P. J. (1995). Differential outcomes attenuate memory impairments on matching-to-position following pyrithiamine-induced thiamine deficiency in rats. Psychobiology, 23, 153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, L. M. and Parsons, J. P. (1997). The effects of delay-interval, inter-trial interval, amnestic drugs, and differential outcomes on matching to position in rats. Psychobiology, 25, 303–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, L. M., Pitkin, S. R. and Careri, J. M. (1999). Memory enhancement in aged rats: the differential outcomes effect. Developmental Psychobiology, 35, 318–327.3.0.CO;2-8>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saunders, R. R. and Sailor, W. (1979). A comparison of three strategies of reinforcement on two-choice learning problems with severely retarded children. American Association for the Education of the Severely/Profoundly Handicapped (AAESPH) Review, 4, 323–333.Google Scholar
Schliebs, R. and Arendt, T. (2006). The significance of the cholinergic system in the brain during aging and in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Neural Transmission, 113, 1625–1644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trapold, M. A. (1970). Are expectancies based upon different positive reinforcing events discriminably different? Learning and Motivation, 1, 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar