Background Prospective memory (PM) involves remembering to execute an intended action in the future, and it is an important skill that predicts everyday functioning in older adults. Older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) exhibit difficulties in PM. This study examined subject and caregiver reports of PM ability and their associations with objective PM. Method Participants included older healthy controls (n = 58), persons with MCI (n = 65), and individuals with AD (n = 18). The Prospective‐Retrospective Memory Questionnaire was used to assess self‐ and caregiver‐reports of participants’ PM skills. Objective abilities were measured using tests of “simple” and “complex” PM. Simple PM was defined as remembering to perform a single action in the future. Complex PM was defined as selecting the correct action based on the context. Result Regression analyses revealed that caregiver‐reported PM predicted complex PM only in healthy controls. In contrast, self‐reported PM did not predict objective PM in any group. Conclusion The results showed that self‐reports of PM are not good indicators of objective PM. While caregiver reports may be more accurate in relation to PM in healthy older adults, they do not align as well with objective PM for those with cognitive impairment. Overall, this research indicates that objective measures should be used to evaluate this important skill that contributes to everyday functioning.

Objective McCaul et al. (2018) recently revised the Dot Counting Test (DCT) cut-off score from ≥17 to 13.80; we evaluated the new cut-off in monolingual and bilingual traumatic brain injury survivors (TBIS) and healthy comparison participants (HCP). Method The sample consisted of 43 acute TBI [ATBI; 23 English monolinguals (EM); 11 English first language bilinguals (EFLB); and 9 English second language bilinguals (ESLB)]; 30 chronic TBI (CTBI; 13 EM; 9 EFLB; 8 ESLB), and 56 HCP (23 EM; 11 EFLB; 22 ESLB). Results An ANCOVA, controlling for age and education, revealed an interaction where ATBI-EFLB had higher E-scores than the other groups and the CTBI-EFLB had lower E-scores than the other groups. Both the conventional and proposed new cut-off (PNC) scores had different failure rates in ATBI (conventional cut-off: 9%; PNC: 28%), CTBI (conventional cut-off: 10%; PNC: 20%), and HCP (conventional cut-off: 11%; PNC: 13%). For language groups, EM (conventional cut-off: 14%; PNC: 22%), EFLB (conventional cut-off: 10%; PNC: 26%), and ESLB (conventional cut-off: 5%; PNC: 10%) demonstrated different failure rates across cut-off scores. Group differences were found with McCaul et al. (2018) cut-off, but not the conventional cut-off score. Also, chi-squared analysis revealed ATBI EFLB and EM had greater failure rates than ATBI ESLB. Conclusion Unfortunately, the new DCT cut-off score resulted in greater failure rates in TBIS. Furthermore, ATBI EM and EFLB were impacted more by the new cut offs than ATBI ESLB who learned English later in life, although the reason for this finding is unclear and requires additional study.

Objective The Everyday Problems Test (EPT) evaluates problem solving ability needed to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), such as medication and financial management. This study assessed the contributions of executive functioning and subtypes of memory on everyday problem solving in healthy aging, amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and non-amnestic MCI. Method Participants included healthy older adults (n = 56) and individuals with MCI (amnestic MCI n = 25; non-amnestic MCI n = 36). Composite scores were derived for Executive Functioning (Trail Making Test-B and FAS), Immediate Memory (short delayed recall scores from the California Verbal Learning Test-II and the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised) and Delayed Memory (long delayed recall scores from both memory tests). The EPT was the measure of everyday problem solving. Results We found that for the control group and the entire MCI group (both amnestic and non-amnestic MCI), executive functioning, immediate memory, and delayed memory predicted problem solving. When examining the separate MCI subtypes, executive functioning and delayed memory predicted problem solving in non-amnestic-MCI, but not amnestic MCI. Conclusions Findings suggest that healthy older adults engage a range of cognitive skills (executive and memory skills) when they engage in everyday problem-solving. Executive and memory skills are also utilized for those with non-amnestic MCI when performing ADLs. Interestingly, in those exhibiting memory impairment and with increased risk for the Alzheimer’s type of dementia, memory and executive functions do not predict ADL problem solving. These findings indicate that people with amnestic-MCI may benefit from being given compensatory strategies to support their memory difficulties when they must perform everyday problem-solving.

Objective We evaluated symptoms of anxiety (via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; HADS, HADS-A) on Stroop Color Word Test (SCWT) performances in traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors, as compared to healthy comparison participants (HC). Method The sample consisted of 40 acute TBI survivors [ATBI; 30 normal symptoms of anxiety (NSA); 10 abnormal symptoms of anxiety (ASA)], 30 chronic TBI survivors (CTBI; 16 NSA; 14 ASA), and 50 HC’s (28 NSA; 22 ASA). All participants passed performance validity testing. The SCWT included the word (SCWT-W), color (SCWT-C), and color-word (SCWT-CW) conditions. A series of ANOVAs were used to evaluate SCWT performances. Results ANOVA revealed a main effect group on the SCWT-C, p = .011, and SCWT-CW, p = .018, with HC’s outperforming the ATBI group. Furthermore, HC outperformed both TBI groups on the SCWT-W, p = .004. We also found that the ASA outperformed the NSA group on the SCWT-W, p = .036. No interactions emerged between group and anxiety. Conclusion The HC group outperformed both TBI groups on the SCWT-W, but only the ATBI group on SCWT-C and SCWT-CW. Furthermore, we found that there were only differences between the anxiety groups on the SCWT-W. Our findings highlight that anxiety impacts HC and TBI groups differently on the SCWT.

Objective The Dot Counting Test (DCT) is a performance validity test. McCaul et al. (2018) recently revised the DCT cut-off score from ≥17 to 13.80; we evaluated the new cut-off in non-Latinx Caucasian and Caucasian Latinx traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors and healthy comparison (HC) participants. Method The sample consisted of 37 acute TBI (ATBI; 11 Caucasian Latinx; 26 non-Latinx Caucasian), 27 chronic TBI (CTBI; 10 Caucasian Latinx; 17 non-Latinx Caucasian), and 55 HC (29 Caucasian Latinx; 26 non-Latinx Caucasian) participants. Results An ANCOVA, controlling for age, revealed no DCT E-scores differences between groups. Both the conventional and the new cut-off scores had different failure rates in ATBI (conventional cut-off: 0%; PNC: 16%), CTBI (conventional cut-off: 7%; PNC: 15%), and HC (conventional cut-off: 10%; PNC: 11%) participants. For the Caucasian Latinx group (conventional cut-off: 6%; PNC: 12%) and the non-Latinx Caucasian group (conventional cut-off: 6%; PNC: 14%), demonstrated different failure rates across cut-off scores. Group differences were found with the McCaul et al. (2018) cut-off and the conventional cut-off. Also, chi-squared analysis revealed non-Latinx Caucasian participants with ATBI had greater failure rates than Caucasian Latinx participants with ATBI. Conclusion The new DCT cut-off score resulted in greater failure rates in TBI survivors. Also, this effect appears to be most pronounced in non-Latinx Caucasian persons with ATBI. Future work should investigate possible reasons for these differences so that more stringent DCT can be utilized in a way that provides less biased results for brain injury survivors across racial and ethnic groups.