Literature DB >> 28847444

Sex effects on spatial learning but not on spatial memory retrieval in healthy young adults.

Dominique Piber1, Jan Nowacki2, Sven C Mueller3, Katja Wingenfeld2, Christian Otte2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Sex differences have been found in spatial learning and spatial memory, with several studies indicating that males outperform females. We tested in the virtual Morris Water Maze (vMWM) task, whether sex differences in spatial cognitive processes are attributable to differences in spatial learning or spatial memory retrieval in a large student sample.
METHODS: We tested 90 healthy students (45 women and 45 men) with a mean age of 23.5 years (SD=3.5). Spatial learning and spatial memory retrieval were measured by using the vMWM task, during which participants had to search a virtual pool for a hidden platform, facilitated by visual cues surrounding the pool. Several learning trials assessed spatial learning, while a separate probe trial assessed spatial memory retrieval.
RESULTS: We found a significant sex effect during spatial learning, with males showing shorter latency and shorter path length, as compared to females (all p<0.001). Yet, there was no significant sex effect in spatial memory retrieval (p=0.615). Furthermore, post-hoc analyses revealed significant sex differences in spatial search strategies (p<0.05), but no difference in the number of platform crossings (p=0.375).
CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that in healthy young adults, males show faster spatial learning in a virtual environment, as compared to females. Interestingly, we found no significant sex differences during spatial memory retrieval. Our study raises the question, whether men and women use different learning strategies, which nevertheless result in equal performances of spatial memory retrieval.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sex effects; Spatial learning; Spatial memory; Virtual morris water maze

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28847444     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2017.08.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Brain Res        ISSN: 0166-4328            Impact factor:   3.332


  6 in total

1.  Assessing the importance of sex in a hippocampus-dependent behavioral test battery in C57BL/6NTac mice.

Authors:  Korey D Stevanovic; Sydney A Fry; Jemma M S DeFilipp; Nicholas Wu; Briana J Bernstein; Jesse D Cushman
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 2.699

2.  Sequential motor learning transfers from real to virtual environment.

Authors:  Yuhi Takeo; Masayuki Hara; Yuna Shirakawa; Takashi Ikeda; Hisato Sugata
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 4.262

3.  Mild Physical Activity Does Not Improve Spatial Learning in a Virtual Environment.

Authors:  Tavor Ben-Zeev; Inbal Weiss; Saar Ashri; Yuval Heled; Itay Ketko; Ran Yanovich; Eitan Okun
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 3.558

4.  Cntn6 deficiency impairs allocentric navigation in mice.

Authors:  Di Mu; Yiliang Xu; Tian Zhao; Kazutada Watanabe; Zhi-Cheng Xiao; Haihong Ye
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2018-04-20       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  Adolescent Hippocampal and Prefrontal Brain Activation During Performance of the Virtual Morris Water Task.

Authors:  Jennifer T Sneider; Julia E Cohen-Gilbert; Derek A Hamilton; Elena R Stein; Noa Golan; Emily N Oot; Anna M Seraikas; Michael L Rohan; Sion K Harris; Lisa D Nickerson; Marisa M Silveri
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Impact of road network structure on dementia-related missing incidents: a spatial buffer approach.

Authors:  Vaisakh Puthusseryppady; Ed Manley; Ellen Lowry; Martyn Patel; Michael Hornberger
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.