2014
DOI: 10.1590/s1679-45082014ao2954
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning effect of computerized cognitive tests in older adults

Abstract: Objective:To evaluate the learning effect of computerized cognitive testing in the elderly.Methods:Cross-sectional study with 20 elderly, 10 women and 10 men, with average age of 77.5 (±4.28) years. The volunteers performed two series of computerized cognitive tests in sequence and their results were compared. The applied tests were: Trail Making A and B, Spatial Recognition, Go/No Go, Memory Span, Pattern Recognition Memory and Reverse Span.Results:Based on the comparison of the results, learning effects were… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
14
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
5
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The missing moderating effect of age on retest effects is in line with some prior studies (Bartels et al, 2010;de Oliveira, Trezza, Busse, & Filho, 2014), whereas it contradicts other evidence that did find a lowering effect of age on retest effects (Calamia et al, 2012;Schleicher, Iddekinge, Morgeson, & Campion, 2010;Iddekinge, Morgeson, Schleicher, & Campion, 2011). Whereas , Schleicher et al (2010), and Iddekinge et al (2011) investigated other cognitive ability tasks, working memory tasks were one of many tasks evaluated by Bartels et al (2010), de Oliveira et al (2014, and Calamia et al (2012). In all of these studies, effects of age on retest effects were thus averaged over several kinds of cognitive ability tasks, and working memory has not been examined individually.…”
Section: Moderator Analysis and Explorative Analysissupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The missing moderating effect of age on retest effects is in line with some prior studies (Bartels et al, 2010;de Oliveira, Trezza, Busse, & Filho, 2014), whereas it contradicts other evidence that did find a lowering effect of age on retest effects (Calamia et al, 2012;Schleicher, Iddekinge, Morgeson, & Campion, 2010;Iddekinge, Morgeson, Schleicher, & Campion, 2011). Whereas , Schleicher et al (2010), and Iddekinge et al (2011) investigated other cognitive ability tasks, working memory tasks were one of many tasks evaluated by Bartels et al (2010), de Oliveira et al (2014, and Calamia et al (2012). In all of these studies, effects of age on retest effects were thus averaged over several kinds of cognitive ability tasks, and working memory has not been examined individually.…”
Section: Moderator Analysis and Explorative Analysissupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Referring to this, we suggest a task-specific learning effect from simple to complex PTMTs, which may have led to smaller test performance variability and increased reproducibility regarding complex tasks. Such task-specific learning effects from simple to complex tasks have been reported by Lezak et al [ 54 ] attributed to the results of Oliveira et al [ 55 ]. The scientists argued that during an initial test, strategies to manage the task might have been developed, which facilitate performing subsequent tasks [ 54 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Moreover, practice effects from repeated testing are a potential limitation affecting the cognitive results, but unlikely explain the improvements entirely despite the lack of interactions on specific constructs; due to the long test-retest duration, comparably large effect sizes (Makizako et al, 2013; de Oliveira et al, 2014; Goldberg et al, 2015), and an active control group that may also have exhibited training-induced cognitive improvements (Liu-Ambrose et al, 2008; Voelcker-Rehage et al, 2010). Finally, although white matter has also been investigated in relation to physical activity (Voss et al, 2013; Hayes et al, 2015; Oberlin et al, 2016) we restricted this study to mainly gray matter thickness in frontal regions and hippocampus volume.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%