4.1 Article

Spatial-simultaneous working memory and selective interference in Down syndrome

期刊

CHILD NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 481-489

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09297049.2014.913557

关键词

Down syndrome; Interference; Visuospatial memory; Intellectual disability; Working memory

资金

  1. University of Padova [CPDA 127939]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several studies have suggested that individuals with Down syndrome (DS) have impairments in some aspects of the visuospatial domain. It has been reported that they are particularly impaired in the spatial-simultaneous working memory (WM) even in advantageous conditions such as when information is grouped to form a configuration. This study aimed to assess the performance of individuals with DS carrying out a spatial-simultaneous WM task in single and dual selective interference conditions in order to better explore the characteristics of their impairment in this area. Groups of individuals with DS and mentally age-matched typically developing (TD) children were asked to carry out a spatial-simultaneous WM task in a single- and in two dual-task conditions. In the single condition, the participants were required to recall an increasing number of positions of red squares presented simultaneously in a matrix. In the dual-task conditions, together with the spatial-simultaneous WM task, the participants were asked to carry out an articulatory suppression task or a tapping task. As has already been shown in other studies, individuals with DS were found to be impaired in carrying out a spatial-simultaneous WM task and showed a worse performance with respect to the TD group in both the conditions. These findings indicate that individuals with DS use the same coding modality as TD children of the same mental age. Just as the TD children, they performed lower in the dual- than in the single-task condition and there was no difference between the verbal and visuospatial conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据