OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have demonstrated the benefit of the differential outcomes procedure (DOP) in human learning. In the present study we aimed to explore whether the DOP might also help to overcome the face recognition memory deficit commonly observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. METHOD: A delayed matching-to-sample task was used. Participants were instructed to choose which of the 4 alternative faces (comparison stimuli) matched the previously seen face (sample stimulus). Either short (5 seconds) or long (25 seconds) delays were interposed between the sample and the comparison stimuli. In the differential outcomes condition each sample face was paired with its own outcome. In contrast, in the nondifferential condition, outcomes were randomly arranged. RESULTS: The differential outcomes effect (DOE) was evident in the AD patients with both accuracy and latency data. That is, they showed a significantly better and faster delayed face recognition when differential outcomes were arranged. The analyses also revealed a significant main effect of delay; participants were slower in the 25 seconds condition than in the 5 seconds condition, but the difference was higher in the patients than in the controls. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate, to our knowledge for the first time, that face recognition memory in patients with Alzheimer is improved when differential outcomes are used and draw attention to the potential of this procedure as a therapeutic technique.
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have demonstrated the benefit of the differential outcomes procedure (DOP) in human learning. In the present study we aimed to explore whether the DOP might also help to overcome the face recognition memory deficit commonly observed in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. METHOD: A delayed matching-to-sample task was used. Participants were instructed to choose which of the 4 alternative faces (comparison stimuli) matched the previously seen face (sample stimulus). Either short (5 seconds) or long (25 seconds) delays were interposed between the sample and the comparison stimuli. In the differential outcomes condition each sample face was paired with its own outcome. In contrast, in the nondifferential condition, outcomes were randomly arranged. RESULTS: The differential outcomes effect (DOE) was evident in the ADpatients with both accuracy and latency data. That is, they showed a significantly better and faster delayed face recognition when differential outcomes were arranged. The analyses also revealed a significant main effect of delay; participants were slower in the 25 seconds condition than in the 5 seconds condition, but the difference was higher in the patients than in the controls. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate, to our knowledge for the first time, that face recognition memory in patients with Alzheimer is improved when differential outcomes are used and draw attention to the potential of this procedure as a therapeutic technique.
Authors: Ana B Vivas; Antonia Ypsilanti; Aristea I Ladas; Foteini Kounti; Magda Tsolaki; Angeles F Estévez Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 5.750