Selective inactivation of adenosine A(2A) receptors in striatal neurons enhances working memory and reversal learning

The adenosine A(2A) receptor (A(2A)R) is highly enriched in the striatum where it is uniquely positioned to integrate dopaminergic, glutamatergic, and other signals to modulate cognition. Although previous studies support the hypothesis that A(2A)R inactivation can be pro-cognitive, analyses of A(2A)R's effects on cognitive functions have been restricted to a small subset of cognitive domains. Furthermore, the relative contribution of A(2A)Rs in distinct brain regions remains largely unknown. Here, we studied the regulation of multiple memory processes by brain region-specific populations of A(2A)Rs. Specifically, we evaluated the cognitive impacts of conditional A(2A)R deletion restricted to either the entire forebrain (i.e., cerebral cortex, hippocampus, and striatum, fb-A(2A)R KO) or to striatum alone (st-A(2A)R KO) in recognition memory, working memory, reference memory, and reversal learning. This comprehensive, comparative analysis showed for the first time that depletion of A(2A)R-dependent signaling in either the entire forebrain or striatum alone is associated with two specific phenotypes indicative of cognitive flexibility-enhanced working memory and enhanced reversal learning. These selective pro-cognitive phenotypes seemed largely attributed to inactivation of striatal A(2A)Rs as they were captured by A(2A)R deletion restricted to striatal neurons. Neither spatial reference memory acquisition nor spatial recognition memory were grossly affected, and no evidence for compensatory changes in striatal or cortical D(1), D(2), or A(1) receptor expression was found. This study provides the first direct demonstration that targeting striatal A(2A)Rs may be an effective, novel strategy to facilitate cognitive flexibility under normal and pathologic conditions.     

Robust inference processes in expository text comprehension

Expository text offers particular challenges to the reader because of the abstract and unfamiliar concepts that it presents and its distinctive structure. The present study had three interrelated aims: (1) It examined the impact of appropriate connectives on the reader's derivation of causal bridging inferences from expository text. (2) It scrutinised texts longer than the ones that we had previously examined (Singer, Harkness, & Stewart, 1997), which in turn made it possible to (3) evaluate the impact of position in the text on inference processing. In Experiments 1a and 1b, a joint profile of target reading times and inference answer times indicated that the inspected inferences reliably accompanied reading only in the presence of appropriate causal connectives. The connective-present conditions of Experiment 1 replicated our previous findings using shorter texts (Singer et al., 1997). Experiment 2 indicated that these inference processes are unaffected by text position. We interpreted these findings with reference to the inference validation model (Singer, Halldorson, Lear, & Andrusiak, 1992).     

The empathic brain: how, when and why?

Recent imaging results suggest that individuals automatically share the emotions of others when exposed to their emotions. We question the assumption of the automaticity and propose a contextual approach, suggesting several modulatory factors that might influence empathic brain responses. Contextual appraisal could occur early in emotional cue evaluation, which then might or might not lead to an empathic brain response, or not until after an empathic brain response is automatically elicited. We propose two major roles for empathy; its epistemological role is to provide information about the future actions of other people, and important environmental properties. Its social role is to serve as the origin of the motivation for cooperative and prosocial behavior, as well as help for effective social communication.     

From children's hands to adults' ears: gesture's role in the learning process

Children can express thoughts in gesture that they do not express in speech--they produce gesture-speech mismatches. Moreover, children who produce mismatches on a given task are particularly ready to learn that task. Gesture, then, is a tool that researchers can use to predict who will profit from instruction. But is gesture also useful to adults who must decide how to instruct a particular child? We asked 8 adults to instruct 38 third- and fourth-grade children individually in a math problem. We found that the adults offered more variable instruction to children who produced mismatches than to children who produced no mismatches--more different types of instructional strategies and more instructions that contained two different strategies, one in speech and the other in gesture. The children thus appeared to be shaping their own learning environments just by moving their hands. Gesture not only reflects a child's understanding but can play a role in eliciting input that could shape that understanding. As such, it may be part of the mechanism of cognitive change.     

Plasticity of memory for new learning in very old age: a story of major loss?

Longitudinal survivors of the Berlin Aging Study (N = 96, mean age = 84 years, range 75-101 years) were instructed and trained in a mnemonic skill to examine plasticity of episodic memory performance in very old age. Performance gains after mnemonic instruction were modest, and most individuals were unable to further enhance their performance during 4 sessions of mnemonic practice. Whereas the proportion of variance explained by measures from the broad fluid-ability domain (e.g., perceptual speed) increased with training, the proportion of variance explained by crystallized-ability domain (e.g., word knowledge) and sociobiographical variables decreased. Furthermore, prior 6-year longitudinal changes (loss) in perceptual speed predicted individual differences in plasticity. Results suggest that aging-induced biological factors are a prominent source of individual differences in cognitive plasticity in very old age.