↓ Skip to main content

An Evaluation of a Working Memory Training Scheme in Older Adults

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An Evaluation of a Working Memory Training Scheme in Older Adults
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2013.00020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura P. McAvinue, Mara Golemme, Marco Castorina, Elisa Tatti, Francesca M. Pigni, Simona Salomone, Sabina Brennan, Ian H. Robertson

Abstract

Working memory is a cognitive process that is particularly vulnerable to decline with age. The current study sought to evaluate the efficacy of a working memory training scheme in improving memory in a group of older adults. A 5-week online training scheme was designed to provide training in the main components of Baddeley's (2000) working memory model, namely auditory and visuospatial short-term and working memory. A group of older adults aged between 64 and 79 were randomly assigned to a trainee (n = 19) or control (n = 17) group, with trainees engaging in the adaptive training scheme and controls engaging in a non-adaptive version of the program. Before and after training and at 3- and 6-month follow-up sessions, trainees and controls were asked to complete measures of short-term and working memory, long-term episodic memory, subjective ratings of memory, and attention and achievement of goals set at the beginning of training. The results provided evidence of an expansion of auditory short-term memory span, which was maintained 6 months later, and transfer to long-term episodic memory but no evidence of improvement in working memory capacity per se. A serendipitous and intriguing finding of a relationship between time spent training, psychological stress, and training gains provided further insight into individual differences in training gains in older adults.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 153 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 25%
Student > Master 22 14%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 34 21%
Unknown 25 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 63 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 12%
Neuroscience 12 7%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 33 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,771,951
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,706
of 5,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,860
of 288,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#33
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,149 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 288,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.