MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233233144 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/rwq47

Age-related decline in item but not spatiotemporal associative memory for a real-world event

2018· preprint· en· W4233233144 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas B. Diamond, Kristoffer Romero, Nivethika Jeyakumar, Brian Levine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpisodic memoryContext (archaeology)PsychologyCognitive psychologyContent-addressable memoryContrast (vision)Associative propertyDevelopmental psychologyCognitionComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Normal aging is typically associated with reduced ability to reconstruct the spatiotemporal context of past events, a core component of episodic memory. However, little is known about our ability to remember the order of events comprising extended real-world experiences and how this ability changes with age. We leveraged the richness and structure of a museum exhibit to address this question. Three months after visiting the exhibit, 141 adults aged 18-84 completed a test of spatiotemporal order memory and old/new recognition using pictures from the exhibit and similar lures, from which measures of associative and item memory were derived. Order discrimination accuracy was modulated by inter-item order and distance in younger and older adults, extending findings from recognition of laboratory stimuli at short delays to remote real-world experiences. In contrast to established findings from laboratory-based assessments, we observed a significant effect of aging on item memory driven byincreased lure susceptibility, but no age-related reduction in spatiotemporal associative memory. These findings present novel insights into different components of memory for real-world experiences at naturalistic timescales and across the lifespan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207