中老年人自我监控与认知策略使用的关系。

IF 1.8 4区 心理学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Nicole Whiteley, Brooke F Beech, Maureen Schmitter-Edgecombe
{"title":"中老年人自我监控与认知策略使用的关系。","authors":"Nicole Whiteley, Brooke F Beech, Maureen Schmitter-Edgecombe","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2025.2451315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Self-monitoring abilities, both in the moment (online) and general self-knowledge (offline) of one's errors, are crucial to implementing modification to tasks to support healthy, independent aging. Cognitive strategies (CS) aid in functional, physical, and cognitive abilities, but without recognition of their need, individuals may struggle to complete daily tasks. The current study examined whether higher levels of self-monitoring would predict higher use and quality of real-world cognitive strategies in older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants included 80 community-dwelling midlife and older adults. Participants completed a remote battery of neuropsychological tasks, including a computerized go-no-go task that evaluated online self-monitoring, and a self-reported questionnaire to measure offline self-monitoring (Cognitive Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). To assess CS, a count score (CS Quantity) and utility score (CS Quality) were computed based on strategies utilized in completion of real-world prospective memory tasks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Online self-monitoring was not significantly related to offline self-monitoring (<i>r</i>(77) = -.07, <i>p</i> = .52). A hierarchical regression revealed that while offline self-monitoring significantly predicted 7% of the variance in CS Quality, above and beyond age, global cognition, and premorbid functioning (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .07, Δ<i>F</i> = 6.23, <i>p</i> = .02), the addition of online self-monitoring did not contribute significant incremental validity (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .001, Δ<i>F</i> = 0.12, <i>p</i> = .73). The second hierarchical regression revealed that neither online nor offline self-monitoring significantly predicted CS Quantity, after controlling for sex (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .004, Δ<i>F</i> = 0.29, <i>p</i> = .60).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results support the distinction between online and offline self-monitoring concepts and their assessment. For community-dwelling midlife and older adults without dementia, clinicians may consider an individual's perceptions of their ability to self-monitor when working to facilitate the use of cognitive strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relationship between self-monitoring and cognitive strategy use in midlife and older adults.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Whiteley, Brooke F Beech, Maureen Schmitter-Edgecombe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13803395.2025.2451315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Self-monitoring abilities, both in the moment (online) and general self-knowledge (offline) of one's errors, are crucial to implementing modification to tasks to support healthy, independent aging. Cognitive strategies (CS) aid in functional, physical, and cognitive abilities, but without recognition of their need, individuals may struggle to complete daily tasks. The current study examined whether higher levels of self-monitoring would predict higher use and quality of real-world cognitive strategies in older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants included 80 community-dwelling midlife and older adults. Participants completed a remote battery of neuropsychological tasks, including a computerized go-no-go task that evaluated online self-monitoring, and a self-reported questionnaire to measure offline self-monitoring (Cognitive Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). To assess CS, a count score (CS Quantity) and utility score (CS Quality) were computed based on strategies utilized in completion of real-world prospective memory tasks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Online self-monitoring was not significantly related to offline self-monitoring (<i>r</i>(77) = -.07, <i>p</i> = .52). A hierarchical regression revealed that while offline self-monitoring significantly predicted 7% of the variance in CS Quality, above and beyond age, global cognition, and premorbid functioning (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .07, Δ<i>F</i> = 6.23, <i>p</i> = .02), the addition of online self-monitoring did not contribute significant incremental validity (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .001, Δ<i>F</i> = 0.12, <i>p</i> = .73). The second hierarchical regression revealed that neither online nor offline self-monitoring significantly predicted CS Quantity, after controlling for sex (Δ<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = .004, Δ<i>F</i> = 0.29, <i>p</i> = .60).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results support the distinction between online and offline self-monitoring concepts and their assessment. For community-dwelling midlife and older adults without dementia, clinicians may consider an individual's perceptions of their ability to self-monitor when working to facilitate the use of cognitive strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2025.2451315\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2025.2451315","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自我监控能力,无论是在当下(在线)还是对自己错误的一般自我认识(离线),对于实施任务修改以支持健康、独立的老龄化至关重要。认知策略(CS)有助于提高功能、身体和认知能力,但如果不认识到它们的需求,个体可能难以完成日常任务。目前的研究调查了更高水平的自我监控是否预示着老年人对现实世界认知策略的更高使用和质量。方法:参与者包括80名居住在社区的中年和老年人。参与者完成了一系列远程神经心理学任务,包括评估在线自我监控的计算机化go-no-go任务,以及测量离线自我监控的自我报告问卷(认知自我效能问卷)。为了评估CS,计数得分(CS数量)和效用得分(CS质量)是基于完成现实世界前瞻性记忆任务所使用的策略计算的。结果:在线自我监测与离线自我监测无显著相关(r(77) = -)。07, p = .52)。分层回归显示,离线自我监测显著预测7%的CS质量方差,高于和超过年龄、整体认知和病前功能(ΔR2 =。07, ΔF = 6.23, p = .02),增加在线自我监测对增加效度没有显著贡献(ΔR2 =。001, ΔF = 0.12, p = 0.73)。第二次层次回归显示,在控制性别(ΔR2 =)后,在线和离线自我监控都不能显著预测CS数量。004, ΔF = 0.29, p = 0.60)。结论:研究结果支持线上与线下自我监控概念的区分及其评价。对于居住在社区的中年人和没有痴呆症的老年人,临床医生在促进认知策略的使用时,可能会考虑个人对自我监控能力的感知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The relationship between self-monitoring and cognitive strategy use in midlife and older adults.

Introduction: Self-monitoring abilities, both in the moment (online) and general self-knowledge (offline) of one's errors, are crucial to implementing modification to tasks to support healthy, independent aging. Cognitive strategies (CS) aid in functional, physical, and cognitive abilities, but without recognition of their need, individuals may struggle to complete daily tasks. The current study examined whether higher levels of self-monitoring would predict higher use and quality of real-world cognitive strategies in older adults.

Methods: Participants included 80 community-dwelling midlife and older adults. Participants completed a remote battery of neuropsychological tasks, including a computerized go-no-go task that evaluated online self-monitoring, and a self-reported questionnaire to measure offline self-monitoring (Cognitive Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). To assess CS, a count score (CS Quantity) and utility score (CS Quality) were computed based on strategies utilized in completion of real-world prospective memory tasks.

Results: Online self-monitoring was not significantly related to offline self-monitoring (r(77) = -.07, p = .52). A hierarchical regression revealed that while offline self-monitoring significantly predicted 7% of the variance in CS Quality, above and beyond age, global cognition, and premorbid functioning (ΔR2 = .07, ΔF = 6.23, p = .02), the addition of online self-monitoring did not contribute significant incremental validity (ΔR2 = .001, ΔF = 0.12, p = .73). The second hierarchical regression revealed that neither online nor offline self-monitoring significantly predicted CS Quantity, after controlling for sex (ΔR2 = .004, ΔF = 0.29, p = .60).

Conclusion: The results support the distinction between online and offline self-monitoring concepts and their assessment. For community-dwelling midlife and older adults without dementia, clinicians may consider an individual's perceptions of their ability to self-monitor when working to facilitate the use of cognitive strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信