ABSTRACT
Objective:To explore the effects of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) on perceived facial trustworthiness for older adults.Methods:From May to June 2019, 30 young subjects (young group) were recruited, and 30 young older adults (young elderly group), 30 middle older adults (middle elderly group), and 30 elderly (elderly group) with normal cognition were recruited. At the same time, 30 older adults with normal cognition (cognitive normal elderly group) and 30 older adults with MCI (MCI elderly group) were recruited. All subjects were scored on the trustworthiness of young and elderly faces.SPSS 26.0 software was used to conduct a multivariate analysis of variance on the data to explore the differences in perceived facial trustworthiness among elderly people of different ages and elderly people with different cognitive function.Results:(1) A comparison of the facial trustworthiness scores of young and elderly faces among the young group, young elderly group, middle elderly group, and elderly group showed that, interaction between face age and age was significant ( F(3, 116)=6.30, P=0.001), the main effect of face age was significant ( F(1, 116)=23.18, P<0.001), and the main effect of age group was significant ( F(3, 116)=11.88, P<0.001). Simple effect analysis showed that the facial trustworthiness scores of elderly faces in the young elderly group (5.02±0.85), middle elderly group (5.15±0.55), and the elderly group (4.87±1.03) were higher than that in the young group (3.74±0.71), and with a statistically significant difference (all P<0.001). There were no significant differences in the facial trustworthiness scores of elderly faces among the young elderly group, middle elderly group, and elderly group (all P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the facial trustworthiness scores of young face among different age groups ( P>0.05). (2)The comparison of facial trustworthiness scores among the young group, cognitive normal elderly group, and the MCI elderly group showed that, the interaction between face age and cognition was significant ( F(2, 87)=8.33, P<0.001), the main effect of face age was significant ( F(1, 87)=5.97, P<0.01), and the main effect of cognition was significant( F(2, 87)=39.37, P<0.001). Simple effect analysis showed that the facial trustworthiness scores of elderly faces in cognitive normal elderly group was higher than those in the young group and the MCI elderly group( P<0.001). There were no significant differences in the facial trustworthiness scores of elderly faces among young group and the MCI elderly group ( P=0.191). The facial trustworthiness scores of young faces in cognitively normal elderly group and young group were higher than those in the MCI elderly group( P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the facial trustworthiness scores of young faces between cognitively normal elderly group and young group ( P=0.134). Conclusion:There is a positive effect on the perceived facial trustworthiness in older adults with normal cognition, but there is no positive effect on the perceived facial trustworthiness in the older adults with MCI. Cognitive decline affects perceived facial trustworthiness in the elderly.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Research on selective attention of mobile visual information is relatively scarce because of difficulties in technology, methodology and experimental condition control. As is well known, most visual information in the real world is mobile and changeable. To examine the mechanism of mobile visual information is helpful to designing natural and highly efficient human-computer interface as well as selecting specialized personnel in special fields OBJECTIVE: To explore the distractive effect of the number, color, and form changes of distractors on multiple-target tracking performance. DESIGN: The present study was a 3 × 2 × 2 within subject design. Participants were undergraduates from Beijing Normal University.SETTING: Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University.PARTICIPANTS: The experiment was performed in the Experimental Psychology Lab of Beijing Normal University in April 2003. Twenty-four undergraduates from Beijing Normal University participated in the experiment. Among them there were 11 males and 13 females aged 17-25 years.They all reported normal or corrected-to-normal vision and normal color perception.METHODS: ① Stimuli were presented on a 17-inch Founder monitor with the resolution of 1028 × 800 pixels. A Founder computer controlled the stimulus presentation and randomization of trials. Response latencies were collected by keyboard response with accuracy of one millisecond. The stimuli were randomly moving "日" characters. The number of "日" characters is 4, 8 and 12. As the participants were tracking the objects, the targets would transform to "(│)" and "(│)", and the distractors would change to "(│)" , "(│)", or "H" by removing lines from "日 ". All distractors and targets were red at the beginning of moving. ② The correct responses were analyzed with 3-factor repeated measures analysis of variance, multiple comparison analysis, and pairwise T-test.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response time and accuracy of pressing the keys.RESULTS: The data of 24 participants were involved in the final statistical analysis. ① The three-factor repeated measures ANOVA results showed that the main effect of the number change of distractors was significant [F(1,22)=6.040, P ＜ 0.05]. The further ANOVA and pairwise comparison in different experiment conditions also showed no distractive effects when target and distractor had different shape but the same color [F(1,2,3)=9.965, P ＜ 0.01]. The further pairwise comparison indicated that when the number of distractors was 2 and 6, the participants' response latencies had no significant effects, and they had significant effect when the number of distractors was 2 and 10, or 6 and 10 (RT10-RT2=46 ms, P ＜ 0.05, two-tail test; RT10-RT6=28ms, P ＜ 0.05, one-tail test). These results showed that the increase in the number of distractors had distractive effects. ② There had no significant effect whether target and distractor had the same color or not, when the number of distractors was 2 and 10. And there had significant effects whether the color of target and distractor was the same or not when the number of distractors was 6; the same shape of target and distractor produced distractive effects (Tsame colons=1.926; Tdifferent colons=2.044,P ＜ 0.05, one-tail test). The main effect of the color was not significant. The further pairwise comparison showed the same result. That is,the color change of diatractors had no obvious distractive effect.CONCLUSION: ① There was distractive effect when the number of distractors increased while the shape and color of distractor and target were different. ② There was no distractive effect when the number of distractors increased while the shape of distractor and target was the same. ③ There was distractive effect when the number of distractors increased while the shape of distractor and target was different, and there was distractive effect when the color of distractor and target was the same.