Age differences in effectiveness of encoding techniques on memory

ABSTRACT

We compared the effectiveness of different encoding techniques across the adult age range. Three hundred participants: 100 younger, 100 middle-aged, and 100 older adults, were asked to encode a set of visually presented concrete and abstract words. Participants were shown target words one at a time, along with prompts (randomly and intermixed, within-subject) to either silently read, read aloud, write, or draw a picture of the target, for a duration of 10-seconds each. On a later free recall test, participants were given 2-minutes to type all the words they could remember from the encoding phase. Across age groups, we showed that drawing, writing, and reading aloud as encoding techniques yielded better memory than silently reading words, with drawing leading to the largest boost. While memory performance did decrease as age increased, it interacted with the encoding technique. Of note, there were no differences in memory performance in middle-aged compared to young adults. Importantly, age differences in memory emerged only when drawing was used as the encoding strategy, in line with previously reported age-related deficits in generating imagery, or integrating it with motoric processes. Despite this, concrete relative to abstract words that were drawn or written during encoding were better retained, regardless of age, suggesting these techniques facilitate formation of age-invariant visuo-spatial representations. Our findings suggest that whether age differences in memory emerge depends on the strategy used at encoding, and the type of information being encoded.

KEYWORDS:

• Encoding techniques
• drawing
• production
• aging
• memory enhancement

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) through a postgraduate scholarship awarded to author ST, and an NSERC Discovery Grant (2020-03917) awarded to author MF.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. The pattern of results remained the same when education and vocabulary scores were added as covariates.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [2020-03917]