4.5 Article

Alzheimer's disease and memory-monitoring impairment: Alzheimer's patients show a monitoring deficit that is greater than their accuracy deficit

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
Volume 49, Issue 9, Pages 2609-2618

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.008

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; Recognition memory; Source memory; Memory monitoring; Calibration; Confidence; Anosognosia

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [0925145]
  2. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG025815, P30 AG13846]
  3. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  4. Divn Of Social and Economic Sciences [0925145] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We assessed the ability of two groups of patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) and two groups of older adults to monitor the likely accuracy of recognition judgments and source identification judgments about who spoke something earlier. Alzheimer's patients showed worse performance on both memory judgments and were less able to monitor with confidence ratings the likely accuracy of both kinds of memory judgments, as compared to a group of older adults who experienced the identical study and test conditions. Critically, however, when memory performance was made comparable between the AD patients and the older adults (e.g., by giving AD patients extra exposures to the study materials), AD patients were still greatly impaired at monitoring the likely accuracy of their recognition and source judgments. This result indicates that the monitoring impairment in AD patients is actually worse than their memory impairment, as otherwise there would have been no differences between the two groups in monitoring performance when there were no differences in accuracy. We discuss the brain correlates of this memory-monitoring deficit and also propose a Remembrance-Evaluation model of memory-monitoring. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available