Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has been described as a memory deficit in the absence of other cognitive dysfunction. It can be thought of as a pre-clinical dementia. Memory impairment in this group is not as severe as in early dementia and thus learning is still possible. We were interested to see if errorless learning, a widely used rehabilitation technique, was of benefit to people with MCI. Since it has been shown that successful rehabilitation is somewhat contingent on awareness of function, we were also interested to see if people with MCI were aware of the benefits of errorless learning. The present study employed an errorless learning procedure on 16 people with MCI and 16 older adult controls to learn two lists of 10 words in errorless and errorful learning conditions. We adopted a metacognitive approach measuring people's memory monitoring through judgements of learning (JOLs) a prediction of future memory performance. The results revealed errorless learning is an effective memory rehabilitation tool for people with MCI, with significant increases in recall performance for both groups relative to errorful learning. Most interestingly participants were aware of the benefits of errorless learning in their JOLs. MCI participants and controls both had significantly higher JOLs for words studied under errorless learning conditions. The learning performance in MCI and theories of metacognitive awareness are discussed.

No abstract

Memory experts, the police and the public completed a memory questionnaire containing a series of statements about autobiographical memory. The statements covered issues such as the nature of memory, determinants of accuracy and the relation of emotion and trauma to memory, and respondents indicated their agreement/disagreement with each of the statements. The police and public were found to share a ‘common sense’ memory belief system (CSMBS) in which memories were like videos/photographs, and accuracy was determined by the number of details recalled and also by their vividness. In direct contrast, the scientific memory belief system, held by memory researchers, largely based on scientific evidence, was the opposite of the CSMBS and memories were judged to be fragmentary, number of details and their nature did not predict accuracy, and memories and their details could be in error and even false. The problematic nature of the CSMBS, which is pervasive in society, in raising the probability of flawed judgments of memory evidence is considered and, by way of illustration, applied to the (very high) attrition rate in complaints of rape.

No abstract