Which training methods are effective for learning new smartphone memory apps after acquired brain injury? A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing trial and error, systematic instruction and error-based learning

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of three skills training methods (Trial and error TEL; systematic instruction SI; and error-based learning EBL) for training the use of a smartphone reminder app in individuals with an acquired brain injury. Participants (N = 38, M_age = 61.21 years, 71.1% stroke) were randomly allocated to one of three training conditions and trained over one two-hour session. Proficiency of performance with the trained app (primary outcome) was assessed immediately post-training, one- and six-weeks post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included generalization of skills, error commission, smartphone use frequency and confidence, and subjective memory complaints. Proficiency with the trained app after TEL was higher than SI immediately after the training (d = 0.87) and EBL at the one-week follow-up (d = 0.98). No differences were found six-weeks post-training. Smartphone use confidence increased at the six-week follow-up after TEL (d = 1.12) and EBL training (d = 0.91) but not after SI (d = 0.26). Self-reported memory complaints decreased across time for all groups (η_p² = 0.30). There was no clearly superior training method for optimizing proficiency with the reminder app. The expected benefits of SI and EBL may not have emerged due to the single-session format of the training. However, smartphone training via TEL or EBL has the potential to address confidence-related barriers to smartphone use.

KEYWORDS:

• Assistive technology
• brain injury
• cognitive rehabilitation
• skills learning
• memory intervention

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health at Monash University. The authors would also like to thank the study participants as well as Dr Jodie Chapman, Aimee Brown, Lucy Ymer, Jennifer Mackovec and Lisa Johnston for their contribution to this work.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This project was funded by the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health at Monash University.