MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013061925 · doi:10.1037/a0031946

Prospective memory in Parkinson disease during a virtual week: Effects of both prospective and retrospective demands.

2013· article· en· W2013061925 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Functions and Memory
Canadian institutionsBaycrest Hospital
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesAustralian Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Parkinson Disease Association
KeywordsProspective memoryRetrospective memoryPsychologyProspective cohort studyCognitive psychologyCognitionEpisodic memoryExplicit memoryNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effect of Parkinson's disease (PD) on event-based prospective memory tasks with varying demand on (1) the amount of strategic attentional monitoring required for intention retrieval (prospective component), and (2) the retrospective memory processes required to remember the contents of the intention or the entire constellation of prospective memory tasks. METHOD: Twenty-four older adults with PD and 28 healthy older adults performed the computerized Virtual Week task, a multi-intention prospective memory paradigm that simulates everyday prospective memory tasks. The Virtual Week included regular (low retrospective memory demand) and irregular (high retrospective memory demand) prospective memory tasks with cues that were focal (low strategic monitoring demand) or less focal (high strategic monitoring demand) to the ongoing activity. RESULTS: For the regular prospective memory tasks, PD participants were impaired when the prospective memory cues were less focal. For the irregular prospective memory tasks, PD participants were impaired regardless of prospective memory cue type. PD participants also had impaired retrospective memory for irregular tasks, which was associated with worse prospective memory for these tasks during the Virtual Week. CONCLUSIONS: When retrospective memory demands are minimized, prospective memory in PD can be supported by cues that reduce the executive control demands of intention retrieval. However, PD-related deficits in self-initiated encoding or planning processes have strong negative effects on the performance of prospective memory tasks, with increased retrospective memory demand.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it