Memory load and the cognitive pupillary response in aging

Abstract

The effect of memory load on the cognitive pupillary response among 16 young adults and 16 older adults was investigated. Mean pupil dilation and reaction time were measured during a Sternberg memory-search task, which involved six levels of memory load. A classic interaction pattern was obtained in which the reaction times of the elderly participants increased more as a function of memory load than the reaction times of the young participants. In the encoding phase of the experiment, mean dilation increased with memory load. No age differences were observed here. In the search phase of the experiment, however, mean pupil dilation was considerably greater in the young than in the elderly participants. Moreover, mean dilation of the older participants was not sensitive to memory load, whereas mean dilation increased as a function of memory load in the young participants. The results suggest that the usefulness of the pupillary response as a correlate of subtle fluctuations in memory load diminishes with old age.

Impaired Word and Face Recognition in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

“…This finding is inconsistent with previous observations that cognitive performance is particularly compromised in individuals with relatively poorer glucoregulatory efficiency under conditions of increased cognitive load (24). However, previous studies comparing cognitive performance in younger and older adults at varying levels of cognitive load suggest that younger adults tend to outperform older adults when the cognitive load is low, but such differences are not typically detected in much higher cognitive load conditions (36,37). This may be because the cognitive capacity of even those individuals at their cognitive peak is exceeded when task demands reach very high levels.…”

Watch Your Step Children! Learning Two-Digit Numbers Through Mirror-Based Observation of Self-Initiated Body Movements

“…For instance, report high reliability coefficients (Cronbach's alpha) of 0.90 and 0.82 for this rating scale in two studies. In addition, the concurrent validity of the nine-point mental effort rating scale appears to be high, as the scale is sensitive enough to detect small variations in task complexity (Van Gerven et al 2004). In this study, a reliability coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) of 0.71 was found.…”

Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings

“…indicator of the actual load experienced: immediate ratings given after every task in a learning or test phase; a delayed rating after the entire learning or test phase; or an average of both immediate and delayed ratings. This could potentially be achieved by comparing objective measures of CL such as dual-task measures (e.g., Brünken et al 2004;Renkl et al 2003) or neuro-physiological measures (e.g., Van Gerven et al 2004) with subjective ratings obtained at different points in time.…”

“…The latter disadvantage also applies to the third possibility, that is, the use of physiological indicators to measure cognitive load, such as heart rate , eye movements (Van Gerven et al 2004; Van Gog and Jarodzka 2013) or brain activities (Antonenko and Niederhauser 2010;Paas et al 2008). Altogether, Sweller et al (2011) see physiological measures and in particular eye tracking results as ''promising, but it is still too early to determine whether the current research emphasis will result in solid results'' (p. 81).…”