RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The Corsi Block Tapping Test, or Corsi Span (CS), is a widely used task to measure visuospatial short-term and working memory. The same setup can be used to administer the Corsi SupraSpan Learning (CSSL) and Recall (CSSR), tests assessing visuospatial long-term memory. While the CS has relatively recent normative data, those of the CSSL are outdated For CSSR, no normative data are available. Given this critical lack, our study aimed to provide updated norms for CS, CSSL, and specifically for the recall delayed phase (CSSR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 340 healthy participants, aged between 20 and 89, took part in the study. Norms were developed using a regression approach and defined using rank equivalent scores and percentiles. RESULTS: Age and education influenced Corsi's Span, while SupraSpan Learning and Recall were influenced by age, education, and span. The comparison with previous norms for Span and SupraSpan Learning shows a high level of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides integrated norms to evaluate visuospatial memory in all aspects of immediate recall, long-term learning and delayed recall. Its use is needed to assess specific neuropsychological deficits, dissociate visuospatial versus verbal memory deficits and allow the evaluation of memory in patients with limited verbal abilities.
RESUMEN
In this study, the number of semantic associates in Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists was varied from 4 to 14 in a modified Sternberg paradigm. The false alarm (FA) and correct rejection (CR) reaction time (RT)/memory-set size (MSS) functions of critical lures showed a cross-over interaction at approximately MSS 7, suggesting a reversal of the relative dominance between these two responses to the critical lure at this point and also indicating the location of the boundary between the sub- and supraspan MSS. For the subspan lists, FA to critical lures was slower than CR, suggesting a slow, strategic mechanism driving the false memory. Conversely, for the supraspan lists, critical lure FA was faster than its CR, suggesting a spontaneous mechanism driving the false memory. Results of two experiments showed that an automatic, fast, and a slow, controlled process could be error-prone or error-corrective, depending on the length of the DRM memory list. Thus there is a dual retrieval process in false memory as in true memory. The findings can be explained by both the activation/monitoring and the fuzzy-trace theories.