CoDAS
https://codas.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/2317-1782/20232022067en
CoDAS
Original Article

Development and validation of an experimental verbal Episodic Memory task in Spanish

Desarrollo y validación de una tarea experimental de Memoria Episódica verbal en español

Gabriel Urrutia Urrutia; Pedro García Montenegro; Karina Carlesso Pagliarin; Márcia Keske-Soares;

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20232022067en CoDAS, vol.35, n4, e20220067, 2023
PDF English
PDF Español
PDF
SciELO
Downloads: 0
Views: 403

Abstract

Purpose

To develop and validate an experimental verbal episodic memory task in Spanish.

Methods

Six encoding blocks were elaborated, three deep and three superficial, each one with different demands of cognitive effort. The blocks were reviewed by four expert judges and tested in a pilot application. The agreement was assessed on whether the task allowed combined processing level and cognitive effort to be manipulated during incidental encoding of words, as well as clarity of instructions, examples, and workflow.

Results

Variables such as lexical availability, metrics, and strength of association were useful to differentiate the cognitive effort between each block. The judges agreed that the processing blocks allowed a combined manipulation of the level of processing and cognitive effort and that the instructions are precise. After the pilot, the participants agreed that the instructions, examples, and way of working were easy to understand and perform.

Conclusion

The results provide evidence of validity related to the content for the proposed experimental task, thus becoming a viable alternative to consider in research aimed at identifying environmental factors that contribute to compensating the defects shown by episodic memory with age.

Keywords

Information Storage and Retrieval; Memory Consolidation; Episodic Memory; Semantics; Validity of Results; Cognitive Aging

Resumen

Propósito

Elaborar y validar una tarea experimental de memoria episódica verbal en español.

Método

Se elaboraron seis bloques de codificación: tres profundos y tres superficiales, cado uno con distintas demandas de esfuerzo cognitivo. Los bloques fueron revisados por cuatro jueces expertos y examinados en una aplicación piloto. Se evaluó la concordancia respecto a si la tarea permitía manipular combinadamente el nivel de procesamiento y el esfuerzo cognitivo durante la codificación incidental de palabras, así como la claridad de las instrucciones, ejemplos y dinámica de trabajo.

Resultados

Variables como la disponibilidad léxica, metría y fuerza de asociación fueron útiles para diferenciar el esfuerzo cognitivo entre cada bloque. Los jueces concordaron que los bloques de procesamiento admiten una manipulación combinada del nivel de procesamiento y esfuerzo cognitivo y que las instrucciones son precisas. Luego del pilotaje, los participantes concordaron que las instrucciones, ejemplos y forma de trabajo eran fácil de comprender y realizar.

Conclusión

Los resultados proporcionan evidencia de validez relacionada con el contenido para la tarea experimental propuesta, transformándose con ello en una alternativa viable de considerar en investigaciones orientadas a identificar factores ambientales que contribuyan a compensar los defectos que muestra la memoria episódica con la edad.

Palabras clave

 Almacenamiento y Recuperación de la Información; Consolidación de la Memoria; Memoria Episódica; Semántica; Validez de los Resultados; Envejecimiento Cognitivo

References

  1. Duarte A, Dulas R. Episodic memory decline in aging. In Thomas A, Gutchess A. The Cambridge handbook of cognitive aging: a life course perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2020. p. 200-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781108552684.013
  2. Mujawar S, Patil J, Chaudhari B, Saldanha D. Memory: neurobiological mechanisms and assessment. Ind Psychiatry J. 2021;30(1, Suppl 1):S311-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.328839 PMid:34908719.
  3. Teles M, Shi D. Longitudinal association between subjective and objective memory in older adults: a study with the Virginia Cognitive Aging Project sample. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2023;30(2):231-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2021.2008862 PMid:34844513.
  4. Ma C, Li M, Wu C. Cognitive function trajectories and factors among chinese older adults with subjective memory decline: CHARLS longitudinal study results (2011-2018). Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(24):16707. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416707 PMid:36554588.
  5. Cadar D, Usher M, Davelaar EJ. Age-related deficits in memory encoding and retrieval in word list free recall. Brain Sci. 2018;8(12):211. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8120211 PMid:30513678.
  6. Mujawar S, Patil J, Chaudhari B, Saldanha D. Memory: neurobiological mechanisms and assessment. Ind Psychiatry J. 2021;30(1, Suppl 1):S311-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.328839 PMid:34908719.
  7. Chadjikyprianou A, Hadjivassiliou M, Papacostas S, Constantinidou F. The Neurocognitive study for the aging: longitudinal analysis on the contribution of sex, age, education and APOE ɛ4 on cognitive performance. Front Genet. 2021;12:680531. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2021.680531 PMid:34326860.
  8. Endemann R, Kamp S. An examination of task factors that influence the associative memory deficit in aging. Front Psychol. 2022;13:991371. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991371 PMid:36211863.
  9. Salthouse T. Trajectories of normal cognitive aging. Psychol Aging. 2019;34(1):17-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pag0000288 PMid:30211596.
  10. Park DC, Festini SB. Theories of memory and aging: a look at the past and a glimpse of the future. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2017;72(1):82-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw066 PMid:27257229.
  11. Jensen A, Secchi D, Jensen TW. A distributed framework for the study of organizational cognition in meetings. Front Psychol. 2022;13:769007. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.769007
  12. Craik FIM. Reducing age-related memory deficits: the roles of environmental support and self-initiated processing activities. Exp Aging Res. 2022;48(5):401-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2022.2084660 PMid:35659168.
  13. Fu L, Maes J, Kessels R, Daselaar S. To boost or to CRUNCH? Effect of effortful encoding on episodic memory in older adults is dependent on executive functioning. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0174217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174217 PMid:28328979.
  14. Wagnon CC, Wehrmann K, Klöppel S, Peter J. Incidental learning: a systematic review of its effect on episodic memory performance in older age. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019;11:173. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00173 PMid:31379557.
  15. Lindquist LA, Miller-Winder AP, Schierer A, Murawski A, Opsasnick L, Curtis LM, et al. Aspects of cognition that impact aging-in-place and long-term care planning. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70(9):2646-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17927 PMid:35726136.
  16. Kelly MO, Risko EF. Study effort and the memory cost of external store availability. Cognition. 2022;228:105228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105228 PMid:35905543.
  17. Nieznański M, Obidziński M. Closing the door to false memory: the effects of levels-of-processing and stimulus type on the rejection of perceptually vs. semantically dissimilar distractors. Psychol Res. 2022;86(3):968-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01544-z PMid:34110472.
  18. Kizilirmak JM, Fischer L, Krause J, Soch J, Richter A, Schott BH. Learning by insight-like sudden comprehension as a potential strategy to improve memory encoding in older adults. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:661346. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.661346 PMid:34194316.
  19. Nieznański M. Levels-of-processing effects on context and target recollection for words and pictures. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2020;209:103127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103127 PMid:32603912.
  20. Huang W, Agbanyo G. Multicultural neurolinguistics: a neuroscientific perceptive of cross-cultural differences in translation. Front Psychol. 2022;13:939517. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.939517 PMid:35903748.
  21. Berkes M, Friesen D, Bialystok E. Cultural context as a biasing factor for language activation in bilinguals. Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2018;33(8):1032-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1446541 PMid:30899766.
  22. Valencia A, Echeverría M. Disponibilidad léxica en estudiantes chilenos (Lexical availability in Chilean students). Santiago de Chile y Concepción: Universidad de Chile y Universidad de Concepción; 1999.
  23. Wojcik EH, Kandhadai P. Paradigmatic associations and individual variability in early lexical-semantic networks: evidence from a free association task. Dev Psychol. 2020;56(1):53-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000844 PMid:31670556.
  24. Zhou N, Huang CM, Cai Q, Tzeng OJL, Huang HW. The effects of aging and perceived loneliness on lexical ambiguity resolution. Front Psychol. 2022;13:978616. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.978616 PMid:36337565.
  25. Diaz MT, Johnson MA, Burke DM, Truong TK, Madden DJ. Age-related differences in the neural bases of phonological and semantic processes in the context of task-irrelevant information. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2019;19(4):829-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13415-018-00671-2 PMid:30488226.
  26. Hernández N, López M. Análisis de las relaciones semánticas a través de una tarea de libre asociación en español con mapas auto-organizados (Analysis of semantic relationsuips from a free-association task in spanish with self-organizing maps). RLA Rev Linguist Teor Apl. 2014;52(2):189-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48832014000200009
  27. Kardan O, Adam KCS, Mance I, Churchill NW, Vogel EK, Berman MG. Distinguishing cognitive effort and working memory load using scale-invariance and alpha suppression in EEG. Neuroimage. 2020;211:116622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116622 PMid:32068164.
  28. Wagnon CC, Wehrmann K, Klöppel S, Peter J. Incidental learning: a systematic review of its effect on episodic memory performance in older age. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019;11:173. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00173 PMid:31379557.
  29. Suzin G, Ravona-Springer R, Ash EL, Davelaar EJ, Usher M. Differences in semantic memory encoding strategies in young, healthy old and MCI patients. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019;11:306. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00306 PMid:31780920.
  30. Balsamo M, Innamorati M, Lamis D. Editorial: clinical psychometrics: old issues and new perspectives. Front Psychol. 2019;10:947. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00947 PMid:31133922.
     
65a84e94a95395471834bea5 codas Articles
2317-1782 (Electronic)
CoDAS ©2024 All rights reserved.

CoDAS

Share this page
Page Sections