Memory patterns of acquisition and retention of verbal and nonverbal information in children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research indicates that children with FASD have both memory and learning deficits. However, there is no consensus about whether the deficits identified from a pattern of impairment, and whether this pattern is consistent with the current theories regarding the organization of memory. Thus, the goal of this study was to further explore memory functions and expose possible patterns that may exist in children with FASD. METHODS: The Children's Memory Scale (CMS) was used to measure visual and verbal memory, as well as learning and encoding, among 30 children with FASD (ages 9-16 years). Functioning was conceptualized through use of a model of working memory. RESULTS: A significant difference between types of verbal memory in the FASD sample was identified. Specifically, recall of word pairs was found to be more impaired than that for stories. In addition to this, recall of immediate word pairs was significantly more impaired than that for delayed word pairs, implying the presence of encoding deficits in this area. CONCLUSIONS: Children and adolescents with FASD displayed specific types of verbal memory deficits and these deficits were greater for immediate rather than delayed memory. These data are consistent with previous studies that describe deficits in immediate memory, and suggest that deficits in delayed memory are better accounted for by encoding deficits. Furthermore, their greatest difficulty arose with those items in which the phonological loop was required, which would have facilitated learning though internal recitation and adequate phonological storage. Further research into these distinctions in memory is warranted, as is exploration into educational techniques that could account for delayed encoding in children with FASD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".