Autocorrection if→of Function Words in Reading Aloud: A Novel Marker of Alzheimer's Risk

Objective: The present study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying the ability to stop "autocorrect" errors elicited by unexpected words in a read-aloud task, and the utility of autocorrection for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers. Method: Cognitively normal partic...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neuropsychology 2023-10, Vol.37 (7), p.813-826
Hauptverfasser: Gollan, Tamar H., Stasenko, Alena, Li, Chuchu, Smirnov, Denis S., Galasko, Douglas, Salmon, David P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective: The present study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying the ability to stop "autocorrect" errors elicited by unexpected words in a read-aloud task, and the utility of autocorrection for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers. Method: Cognitively normal participants (total n = 85; n = 64 with cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] biomarkers) read aloud six short paragraphs in which 10 critical target words were replaced with autocorrect targets, for example, The player who scored that final [paint] for the local team reported [him] experience. Autocorrect targets either replaced the most expected/dominant completion (i.e., point) or a less expected/nondominant completion (i.e., basket), and within each paragraph half of the autocorrect targets were content words (e.g., point/paint) and half were function words (e.g., his/him). Participants were instructed to avoid autocorrecting. Results: Participants produced more autocorrect errors in paragraphs with dominant than with nondominant targets, and with function than with content targets. Cognitively normal participants with high CSF Tau/Aβ42 (i.e., an AD-like biomarker profile) produced more autocorrect total errors than those below the Tau/Aβ42 threshold, an effect also significant with dominant-function targets alone (e.g., saying his instead of him). A logistic regression model with dominant-function errors and age showed errors as the stronger predictor of biomarker status (sensitivity 83%; specificity 85%). Conclusions: Difficulty stopping autocorrect errors is associated with biomarkers indicating preclinical AD, and reveals promise as a diagnostic tool. Greater vulnerability of function over content words to autocorrection in individuals with AD-like biomarkers implicates monitoring and attention (rather than semantic processing) in the earliest of cognitive changes associated with AD risk. Key Points Question: This study investigated if it is possible to determine who might be at risk for AD using a simple read-aloud task with an instruction to avoid correcting words that were written incorrectly (e.g., carton instead of curtain). Findings: Participants at risk for AD based on CSF biomarkers had more difficulty stopping themselves from autocorrecting misspelled words, especially if they were highly expected function words (e.g., this is not they word you were expecting). Importance: These results suggest that the earliest cognitive changes associated with AD pathology are primarily relat
ISSN:0894-4105
1931-1559
1931-1559
DOI:10.1037/neu0000829