Autocorrection if→of function words in reading aloud: A novel marker of Alzheimer’s risk.

Abstract

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.

Language switching and speaking a nondominant language challenge executive control: Preliminary data for novel behavioral markers of Alzheimer’s risk in Spanish–English bilinguals.

“…Naturally competing responses must also be controlled in another language task that recently showed sensitivity to AD risk. Reading aloud of paragraphs with purposeful typos (e.g., the window carton ), or language switches (e.g., in la kitchen) discriminated bilinguals with AD from controls (Gollan, Li, et al, 2020; Gollan et al, 2017), and errors in reading aloud were sensitive to AD biomarkers in monolinguals (Gollan, Smirnov, et al, 2020; Gollan, Stasenko, Li, et al, 2023). This read-aloud task naturally puts in competition the written word versus the expected words (e.g., the window curtain, in the kitchen ).…”

The function/content word distinction and eye movements in reading.

“…More recent evidence that the identities of function words may not be encoded with the same detail as content words comes from studies focusing on the detection of errors in the text. Gollan et al (2020Gollan et al ( , 2022 had older adults read aloud passages in which some words were replaced with nonsensical alternatives. Half were function words replacing other function words, and half were content words replacing other content words.…”

Special issue on “Novel neuropsychological instruments for the prodromal and preclinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease”.

“…Results showed that simple linguistic features were associated with cognitive status and that the narrative description score was quite efficient in discriminating healthy controls from individuals with early cognitive impairment (i.e., SCD and MCI) probably because it captured the key discriminating features. Gollan et al (2022) administered a reading-aloud task to cognitively normal participants (most of whom had CSF biomarkers). The task consisted of short paragraphs in which unexpected content or function words elicited spontaneous autocorrection (prohibited by test instructions).…”

“…Gollan et al (2022) administered a reading-aloud task to cognitively normal participants (most of whom had CSF biomarkers). The task consisted of short paragraphs in which unexpected content or function words elicited spontaneous autocorrection (prohibited by test instructions).…”