RESUMO
Williams syndrome (WS) and Down syndrome (DS) are two neurodevelopmental disorders with distinct genetic origins characterized by mild to moderate intellectual disability. Individuals with WS or DS exhibit impaired hippocampus-dependent place learning and enhanced striatum-dependent spatial response learning. Here, we used the Weather Prediction Task (WPT), which can be solved using hippocampus- or striatum-dependent learning strategies, to determine whether individuals with WS or DS exhibit similar profiles outside the spatial domain. Only 10% of individuals with WS or DS solved the WPT. We further assessed whether a concurrent memory task could promote reliance on procedural learning to solve the WPT in individuals with WS but found that the concurrent task did not improve performance. To understand how the probabilistic cue-outcome associations influences WPT performance, and whether individuals with WS or DS can ignore distractors, we assessed performance using a visual learning task with differing reward contingencies, and a modified WPT with unpredictive cues. Both probabilistic feedback and distractors negatively impacted the performance of individuals with WS or DS. These findings are consistent with deficits in hippocampus-dependent learning and executive functions, and reveal the importance of congruent feedback and the minimization of distractors to optimize learning in these two populations.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Down , Tempo (Meteorologia) , Síndrome de Williams , Síndrome de Down/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Síndrome de Williams/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Adulto Jovem , Adolescente , Função Executiva/fisiologia , Criança , Aprendizagem/fisiologia , Desempenho Psicomotor/fisiologia , RecompensaRESUMO
Event-based prospective memory (PM) was investigated in children with Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), using a novel experimental procedure to evaluate the role of working memory (WM) load, attentional focus, and reward sensitivity. The study included 24 children with ADHD and 23 typically-developing controls. The experimental paradigm comprised one baseline condition (BC), only including an ongoing task, and four PM conditions, varying for targets: 1 Target (1T), 4 Targets (4T), Unfocal (UN), and Reward (RE). Children with ADHD were slower than controls on all PM tasks and less accurate on both ongoing and PM tasks on the 4T and UN conditions. Within the ADHD group, the accuracy in the RE condition did not differ from BC. A significant relationship between ADHD-related symptoms and reduced accuracy/higher speed in PM conditions (PM and ongoing trials), but not in BC, was detected. Our data provide insight on the adverse role of WM load and attentional focus and the positive influence of reward in the PM performance of children with ADHD. Moreover, the relation between PM and ADHD symptoms paves the road for PM as a promising neuropsychological marker for ADHD diagnosis and intervention.