Literature DB >> 25653376

Learning to integrate versus inhibiting information is modulated by age.

Marinella Cappelletti1, Helen Pikkat2, Emily Upstill2, Maarten Speekenbrink3, Vincent Walsh2.   

Abstract

Cognitive training aiming at improving learning is often successful, but what exactly underlies the observed improvements and how these differ across the age spectrum are currently unknown. Here we asked whether learning in young and older people may reflect enhanced ability to integrate information required to perform a cognitive task or whether it may instead reflect the ability to inhibit task-irrelevant information for successful task performance. We trained 30 young and 30 aging human participants on a numerosity discrimination task known to engage the parietal cortex and in which cue-integration and inhibitory abilities can be distinguished. We coupled training with parietal, motor, or sham transcranial random noise stimulation, known for modulating neural activity. Numerosity discrimination improved after training and was maintained long term, especially in the training + parietal stimulation group, regardless of age. Despite the quantitatively similar improvement in the two age groups, the content of learning differed remarkably: aging participants improved more in inhibitory abilities, whereas younger subjects improved in cue-integration abilities. Moreover, differences in the content of learning were reflected in different transfer effects to untrained but related abilities: in the younger group, improvements in cue integration paralleled improvements in continuous quantity (time and space), whereas in the elderly group, improvements in numerosity-based inhibitory abilities generalized to other measures of inhibition and corresponded to a decline in space discrimination, possibly because conflicting learning resources are used in numerosity and continuous quantity processing. These results indicate that training can enhance different, age-dependent cognitive processes and highlight the importance of identifying the exact processes underlying learning for effective training programs.
Copyright © 2015 the authors 0270-6474/15/352213-13$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ageing; brain stimulation; learning strategies; neuroenhancement; parietal lobe; quantity processing

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25653376      PMCID: PMC6705357          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1018-14.2015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  4 in total

Review 1.  Understanding the Effects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation in Numerical Cognition: A Systematic Review for Clinical Translation.

Authors:  Giulia Lazzaro; Elisa Fucà; Cristina Caciolo; Andrea Battisti; Floriana Costanzo; Cristiana Varuzza; Stefano Vicari; Deny Menghini
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 2.  A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools.

Authors:  A J Woods; A Antal; M Bikson; P S Boggio; A R Brunoni; P Celnik; L G Cohen; F Fregni; C S Herrmann; E S Kappenman; H Knotkova; D Liebetanz; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; W Paulus; A Priori; D Reato; C Stagg; N Wenderoth; M A Nitsche
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-11-22       Impact factor: 3.708

3.  Transcranial random noise stimulation and cognitive training to improve learning and cognition of the atypically developing brain: A pilot study.

Authors:  Chung Yen Looi; Jenny Lim; Francesco Sella; Simon Lolliot; Mihaela Duta; Alexander Alexandrovich Avramenko; Roi Cohen Kadosh
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Dot Display Affects Approximate Number System Acuity and Relationships with Mathematical Achievement and Inhibitory Control.

Authors:  Jade Eloise Norris; Julie Castronovo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.