We conducted an experiment to evaluate the ability of 32 younger and older adults to visually perceive distances in an outdoor setting. On any given trial, the observers viewed 2 environmental distances and were required to estimate the distance ratio-the length of the (usually) larger distance relative to that of the shorter. The stimulus distance ratios ranged from 1.0 (the stimulus distances were identical) to 8.0 (1 distance interval was 8.0 times longer than the other). The stimulus distances were presented within a 26 m × 60 m portion of a grassy field. The observers were able to reliably estimate the stimulus distance ratios: The overall Pearson r correlation coefficient relating the judged and actual distance ratios was 0.762. Fifty-eight percent of the variance in the observers' perceived distance ratios could thus be accounted for by variations in the actual stimulus ratios. About half of the observers significantly underestimated the distance ratios, while the judgments of the remainder were essentially accurate. Significant modulatory effects of sex and age occurred, such that the male observers' judgments were the most precise, while those of the older males were the most accurate.

The ability of 26 younger (mean age was 22.5 years) and older adults (mean age was 72.6 years) to haptically perceive material properties was evaluated. The participants manually explored (for 5 seconds) 42 surfaces twice and placed each of these 84 experimental stimuli into one of seven categories: paper, plastic, metal, wood, stone, fabric, and fur/leather. In general, the participants were best able to identify fur/leather and wood materials; in contrast, recognition performance was worst for stone and paper. Despite similar overall patterns of performance for younger and older participants, the younger adults' recognition accuracies were 26.5% higher. The participants' tactile acuities (assessed by tactile grating orientation discrimination) affected their ability to identify surface material. In particular, the Pearson r correlation coefficient relating the participants' grating orientation thresholds and their material identification performance was -0.8: The higher the participants' thresholds, the lower the material recognition ability. While older adults are able to effectively perceive the solid shape of environmental objects using the sense of touch, their ability to perceive surface materials is significantly compromised.

Growing evidence supports the idea that the ultimate biofeedback is to reward sensory pleasure (e.g., enhanced visual clarity) in real-time to neural circuits that are associated with a desired performance, such as excellent memory retrieval. Neurofeedback is biofeedback that uses real-time sensory reward to brain activity associated with a certain performance (e.g., accurate and fast recall). Working memory is a key component of human intelligence. The challenges are in our current limited understanding of neurocognitive dysfunctions as well as in technical difficulties for closed-loop feedback in true real-time. Here we review recent advancements of real time neurofeedback to improve memory training in healthy young and older adults. With new advancements in neuromarkers of specific neurophysiological functions, neurofeedback training should be better targeted beyond a single frequency approach to include frequency interactions and event-related potentials. Our review confirms the positive trend that neurofeedback training mostly works to improve memory and cognition to some extent in most studies. Yet, the training typically takes multiple weeks with 2–3 sessions per week. We review various neurofeedback reward strategies and outcome measures. A well-known issue in such training is that some people simply do not respond to neurofeedback. Thus, we also review the literature of individual differences in psychological factors e.g., placebo effects and so-called “BCI illiteracy” (Brain Computer Interface illiteracy). We recommend the use of Neural modulation sensitivity or BCI insensitivity in the neurofeedback literature. Future directions include much needed research in mild cognitive impairment, in non-Alzheimer’s dementia populations, and neurofeedback using EEG features during resting and sleep for memory enhancement and as sensitive outcome measures.

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the ability of younger and older adults to recognize 3-D object shape from patterns of optical motion. In Experiment 1, participants were required to identify dotted surfaces that rotated in depth (i.e., surface structure portrayed using the kinetic depth effect). The task difficulty was manipulated by limiting the surface point lifetimes within the stimulus apparent motion sequences. In Experiment 2, the participants identified solid, naturally shaped objects (replicas of bell peppers, Capsicum annuum) that were defined by occlusion boundary contours, patterns of specular highlights, or combined optical patterns containing both boundary contours and specular highlights. Significant and adverse effects of increased age were found in both experiments. Despite the fact that previous research has found that increases in age do not reduce solid shape discrimination, our current results indicated that the same conclusion does not hold for shape identification. We demonstrated that aging results in a reduction in the ability to visually recognize 3-D shape independent of how the 3-D structure is defined (motions of isolated points, deformations of smooth optical fields containing specular highlights, etc.).

A total of 36 younger (mean age = 21.3 years) and older adults (mean age = 73.8 years) haptically explored plastic copies of naturally shaped objects (bell peppers, Capsicum annuum) one at a time for 7 s each. The participants' task was to then choose which of 12 concurrently visible objects had the same solid shape as the one they felt. The younger and older participants explored the object shapes using either one, three, or five fingers (there were six participants for each combination of number of fingers and age group). The outcome was different from that of previous research conducted with manmade objects. Unlike Jansson and Monaci (2006) , we found that for most objects, our participants' performance was unaffected by variations in the number of fingers used for haptic exploration. While there was no significant overall effect of the number of fingers, there was a significant main effect of age. The younger adults' shape matching performance was 48.6% higher than that of the older adults. When perceiving naturally shaped objects such as bell peppers, it appears that the usage of a single finger can be as effective as haptic exploration with a whole complement of five fingers.