Cognitive and structural predictors of novel task learning, and contextual predictors of time series of daily task performance during the learning period

Abstract

Investigation into methods of addressing cognitive loss exhibited later in life is of paramount importance to the field of cognitive aging. The field continues to make significant strides in designing efficacious cognitive interventions to mitigate cognitive decline, and the very act of learning a demanding task has been implicated as a potential mechanism of augmenting cognition in both the field of cognitive intervention and studies of cognitive reserve. The present study examines individual-level predictors of complex skill learning and day-to-day performance on a gamified working memory updating task, the BirdWatch Game, intended for use as a cognitive intervention tool in older adults. A measure of verbal episodic memory and the volume of a brain region involved in verbal working memory and cognitive control (the left inferior frontal gyrus) were identified as predictors of learning rates on the BirdWatch Game. These two neuro-cognitive measures were more predictive of learning when considered in conjunction than when considered separately, indicating a complementary effect. Additionally, auto-regressive time series forecasting analyses were able to identify meaningful daily predictors (that is, mood, stress, busyness, and hours of sleep) of performance-over-time on the BirdWatch Game in 50% of cases, with the specific pattern of contextual influences on performance being highly idiosyncratic between participants. These results highlight the specific contribution of language processing and cognitive control abilities to the learning of the novel task examined in this study, as well as the variability of subject-level influences on task performance during task learning.

What Does It Take to Play the Piano? Cognito-Motor Functions Underlying Motor Learning in Older Adults

“…The acquisition of skills is believed to undergo separate stages featuring parallel and interacting processes [4,[7][8][9][10], beginning with an initial fast learning stage with rapid improvements and reaching a final stage achieving individual asymptotic performance. Although very differently labeled (cognitive-associative-autonomous [8]; phase 1-phase 2-phase 3 [7]; knowledge-based-rule-based-skill-based [11]; declarative-declarative/proceduralprocedural [12]; exploration-selection-refinement [13]; early-middle-late [14]; etc. ), there is a general agreement on a three-stage process of learning, with a few exceptions (e.g., four and five stages in the learning models of Verwey [15] and Doyon and Benali [1], respectively).…”

“…Brain Sci. 2024,14, 405 5 of 18 120-2944.3 h). Participants with extensive piano experience (cumulative practicing time > 4000 h) were excluded from the study.…”