Lara A Boyd1, Eric D Vidoni, Catherine F Siengsukon. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, T325-2211 Westbrook Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 2B5 Canada. lara.boyd@ubc.ca
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify which characteristics of a multidimensional sequence containing motor, spatial, and temporal elements would be most salient for motor sequence learning and whether age might differentially affect this learning. SUBJECTS: Younger (n=11, mean age=26.0 years), middle-aged (n=13, mean age=50.7 years), and older (n=11, mean age=77.5 years) adults who were neurologically intact participated in the study. METHODS: Participants practiced a sequencing task with repeated motor, spatial, and temporal dimensions for 2 days; on a separate third day, participants completed retention and interference tests designed to assess sequence learning and which elements of the sequence were learned. The mean median response time for each block of responses was used to assess motor sequence learning. RESULTS: Younger and middle-aged adults demonstrated sequence-specific motor learning at retention testing via faster response times for repeated sequences than random sequences; both of these groups showed interference for the motor dimension. In contrast, older adults demonstrated nonspecific learning (ie, similar improvements in response time for both random and repeated sequences). These findings were shown by a lack of difference between random and repeated sequence performance in the older adult group both at retention testing and during interference tests. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Our data suggest that, when younger and middle-aged adults practice sequences containing multiple dimensions of movement, the motor element is most important for motor learning. The absence of sequence-specific change demonstrated by an older adult group that was healthy suggests an age-related impairment in motor learning that may have profound implications for rehabilitation.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify which characteristics of a multidimensional sequence containing motor, spatial, and temporal elements would be most salient for motor sequence learning and whether age might differentially affect this learning. SUBJECTS: Younger (n=11, mean age=26.0 years), middle-aged (n=13, mean age=50.7 years), and older (n=11, mean age=77.5 years) adults who were neurologically intact participated in the study. METHODS:Participants practiced a sequencing task with repeated motor, spatial, and temporal dimensions for 2 days; on a separate third day, participants completed retention and interference tests designed to assess sequence learning and which elements of the sequence were learned. The mean median response time for each block of responses was used to assess motor sequence learning. RESULTS: Younger and middle-aged adults demonstrated sequence-specific motor learning at retention testing via faster response times for repeated sequences than random sequences; both of these groups showed interference for the motor dimension. In contrast, older adults demonstrated nonspecific learning (ie, similar improvements in response time for both random and repeated sequences). These findings were shown by a lack of difference between random and repeated sequence performance in the older adult group both at retention testing and during interference tests. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Our data suggest that, when younger and middle-aged adults practice sequences containing multiple dimensions of movement, the motor element is most important for motor learning. The absence of sequence-specific change demonstrated by an older adult group that was healthy suggests an age-related impairment in motor learning that may have profound implications for rehabilitation.
Authors: Máximo Zimerman; Marie Nitsch; Pascal Giraux; Christian Gerloff; Leonardo G Cohen; Friedhelm C Hummel Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2012-12-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Rachael K Raw; Richard M Wilkie; Richard J Allen; Matthew Warburton; Matteo Leonetti; Justin H G Williams; Mark Mon-Williams Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maike Hoff; Sabrina Trapp; Elisabeth Kaminski; Bernhard Sehm; Christopher J Steele; Arno Villringer; Patrick Ragert Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Caroline D C Altermann; Alexandre S Martins; Felipe P Carpes; Pâmela B Mello-Carpes Journal: Braz J Phys Ther Date: 2014 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.377