Does differential visual exploration contribute to visual memory impairments in 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome?

Bostelmann, Mathilde; Glaser, Bronwyn; Zaharia, Alexandra; Eliez, Stéphan; Schneider, Maude

doi:10.1111/jir.12440

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(114 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, although stimuli were carefully selected, paying attention to floor or ceiling effects, the non-verbal task was more difficult than the verbal task. This was true for individuals with 22q11DS possibly influenced by specific deficits in visual analyses previously described (14,44), but also for the typically developing controls. Therefore, it is likely that the abstract nature of the chosen non-verbal stimuli generated an additional difficulty for all participants.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…Furthermore, previous results have shown that the degree of impairment in non-verbal memory tasks varies depending on the type of stimuli, with greater deficits for more abstract or complex material (e.g., faces or landscape vs. dot localization) ( 13 ). A study using eye-tracking showed atypical exploration strategies (more time spent in the center of the image, less on the peripheral details), leading to sub-optimal encoding and subsequently poorer memory performance ( 14 ). Only few studies investigated encoding in 22q11DS using drawings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Fiksinski et al ( 35 ) demonstrated lower performance in immediate and delayed reproduction of five drawings in adults. Bostelmann et al ( 14 ) highlighted impaired encoding on a drawing reproduction task, related to an abnormal pattern of visual exploration measured with the eye-tracking technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

From Learning to Memory: A Comparison Between Verbal and Non-verbal Skills in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Previous studies on possible memory deficits in 22q11DS often focused on quantifying the information memorized, whereas learning processes have been mostly overlooked. Furthermore, methodological differences in task design have made verbal and non-verbal comparison challenging and mixed results have been observed depending on chosen stimuli.Method: 135 participants (78 with 22q11DS) completed a multi-trial memory task modeled after the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Task, comparing verbal and non-verbal learning as well as retention over time. Performance in the 22q11DS group were compared to controls and learning curves were analyzed.Results: In 22q11DS, slower acquisition of non-verbal material and higher rates of errors in both verbal and non-verbal tasks was observed. After 30 min, free recall performance, when corrected for initial learning rate, was similar between 22q11DS and controls. Conversely, recognition performance was overall weaker for 22q11DS in both modalities (verbal and non-verbal).Conclusion: This study examined how information is acquired, retained in memory over time and how different recall modalities (free recall vs. recognition) could yield different performances. Clinical implications of the findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From Learning to Memory: A Comparison Between Verbal and Non-verbal Skills in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our results might suggest that the eye-tracking measures used in the current study are insufficient for understanding task performance. Other mechanisms such as idiosyncratic scanning strategies and encoding process of visual stimuli and visual memory of faces could also contribute to their performance [ 63 , 65 , 66 ]. Future research should consider the use of the Dynamic Scanning Index (reflecting the number of times that the eye gaze goes in and out of a core feature) that might better reflect task performance [ 64 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face processing in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: atypical development and visual scanning alterations

Zaharia

Schneider

Glaser

et al. 2018

J Neurodevelop Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrevious research links social difficulties to atypical face exploration in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS). Two types of face processing are distinguished: configural (CFP) and featural (FFP). CFP develops later in life and plays an important role in face and emotion recognition abilities. Recent studies reported atypical development of CFP in several neurodevelopmental disorders. Taking previous reports of atypical face exploration one step further, our study aims at characterizing face processing in children and adolescents with 22q11.2DS. First, we sought to identify biases in the first two fixation positions on faces and to detect differences between CFP and FFP in 22q11.2DS using eye-tracking technology. Second, we investigated the developmental trajectories of CFP and FFP using accuracy data from follow-up evaluation.MethodsSeventy-five individuals with 22q11.2DS and 84 typically developed (TD) individuals (aged 6–21 years) completed a discrimination task (“Jane task”) inducing CFP and FFP in an eye-tracking setting. Thirty-six individuals with 22q11DS and 30 TD from our sample completed a longitudinal follow-up evaluation.ResultsFindings revealed that individuals with 22q11.2DS demonstrate an early bias toward the mouth region during the initial fixations on the faces and reduced flexibility exploration of the faces, with a reduced number of transitions between faces and longer fixations compared to the TD group. Further, scanpaths did not differ between CFP and FFP in the 22q11.2DS group. Longitudinal analysis of accuracy data provided evidence for atypical development of CFP in 22q11.2DS.ConclusionsThe current study brings new evidence of altered face exploration in 22q11.2DS and identifies developmental mechanisms that may contribute to difficulties impacting social interactions in the syndrome.

show abstract

“…On a behavioral level, a dissociation between verbal and visual memory processes has been described in 22q11DS. Indeed, probably due to poorer visuospatial and visuo-attentional processes, visual memory acquisition is not optimal and visual memory is generally reported as impaired (Bostelmann, Glaser, Zaharia, Eliez, & Schneider, 2017;Lajiness-O'Neill et al, 2005;Woodin et al, 2001). By contrast, it has been argued so far that verbal memory stands out as a relative strength in the 22q11DS cognitive profile (Jacobson et al, 2010;Lajiness-O'Neill et al, 2005;Lewandowski, Shashi, Berry, & Kwapil, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term verbal memory deficit and associated hippocampal alterations in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

Maeder

Sandini

Zöller

et al. 2019

Child Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Does differential visual exploration contribute to visual memory impairments in 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome?

Cited by 7 publications

References 52 publications

From Learning to Memory: A Comparison Between Verbal and Non-verbal Skills in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

From Learning to Memory: A Comparison Between Verbal and Non-verbal Skills in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

Face processing in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: atypical development and visual scanning alterations

Long-term verbal memory deficit and associated hippocampal alterations in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About