Abstract
Memory decline has been observed in the aging population and is a risk factor for the later development of dementia. Understanding how memory is preserved in older adults has been an important topic. The present study examines the hemodynamic features of older adults whose memory is comparable with that of young adults. In the present study, 45 younger and 45 older adults performed the visual memory task with various difficulty levels (i.e., the items to be remembered), and their cerebral hemodynamics at each level were measured by functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). The results showed that older adults exhibited higher activation than younger adults under more difficult but not easier levels. In addition, older adults whose performance is comparable with that of young adults (i.e., being able to remember six items) showed more right-lateralized activation. However, those unable to do so showed more left-lateralized activation. The results suggested that high-performing older adults possess successful compensatory mechanisms by recruiting cognitive resources in a specialized brain region.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
It is well-documented that normal aging is associated with a gradual decline in cognitive function, including processing speed, selective and divided attention, episodic memory, semantic memory, visual construction skills, and executive functions [1, 2]. Working memory, a cognitive system that temporarily stores and manipulates information for performing a wide range of cognitive activities [3], is also one of the major cognitive functions that decline during the aging process [4,5,6]. However, it was found that some older adults can still maintain stable cognitive function [7,8,9,10]. Identifying the characteristics of these high-performing older adults may provide insight into slowing down age-related cognitive decline.
Functional neuroimaging studies have reported different activation patterns in older adults when compared to younger adults. Some studies have found lower activation in older adults, along with poorer task performance [11, 12]. Some studies have suggested that this lower activation reflects participants reaching the limits of their cognitive capacity and depleting neural resources needed to meet the challenging demand of the cognitive task [13, 14]. Conversely, greater activation was also observed in older adults [15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. One of the major explanations for this is attributed to compensatory processing in the aging brain. The compensation hypothesis posits that older adults spend the extra cognitive effort to compensate for their age-related deterioration in neural efficiency [22, 23]. Therefore, when task demands are subjectively low, activation is comparable between older and younger adults because the task appears effortless to both groups. However, when demands are high, greater activation is observed in older adults, indicating that they exert more cognitive effort to cope [15, 16].
Studies investigating the activation patterns of high- and low-performing older adults have consistently found differences in the extent of lateralized activation between these two groups, suggesting that they may utilize different compensation mechanisms [24,25,26,27]. However, these findings have been inconsistent, with mixed lateralized activation patterns reported across different studies. Specifically, compared to low-performing older adults, high-performing older adults were found to exhibit more bilateral activation [24], or more unilateral activation on the brain hemisphere commonly known to specialize [25, 27] (i.e., the left hemisphere for verbal tasks, the right hemisphere for visual tasks), but some studies have found the activation on the opposite side [26]. The inconsistent findings may be attributed to the varied differences in cognitive performance between the two groups across different studies. For working memory, most studies have used the 50th percentile of the n-back task performance as an arbitrary cut-off to differentiate between the two groups [27,28,29]. However, this approach depends on the n-back task design and the performance of the recruited sample, making the differentiation between the two groups unclear. Consequently, the two groups identified in one study may not be classified in the same way in another study, which could contribute to the mixed findings reported. Therefore, an experimental paradigm with a standardized cut-off may provide a clearer sense of heterogeneity between high-performing and low-performing older adults for comparison.
The visual memory span task is a commonly employed experimental paradigm that measures visuospatial working memory [30,31,32]. It was modified from the Corsi Block-Tap** Test [33], a standardized neuropsychological test that has been widely used in both research and clinical settings [34,35,36,37,38]. In its standardized version, the examiner taps the blocks on a board in sequences, and the participant is asked to reproduce the sequence immediately. The number of blocks in the longest sequence correctly reproduced indicates the individual’s visuospatial working memory capacity. Although several versions of the visual memory span task were developed, the performance was comparable [34, 37]. In specific, while older adults with normal cognition usually obtain a score of 5 [36], those with mild cognitive impairment or dementia only obtain a score of 4 [39, 40], or even 3 [41]. By contrast, younger adults were found to obtain a score of 6 to 7 [34, 42].
Functional neuroimaging studies have suggested that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is one of the brain regions that play an important role in performing the visual memory span task [43, 44]. Recently, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was increasingly employed in neuroimaging studies to determine task-related brain activation. fNIRS is a non-invasive optical neuroimaging technique that utilizes light in the near-infrared spectrum (650 – 950 nm) to monitor hemodynamic responses evoked by brain activities. It measures the brain tissue concentration changes of oxygenated (HbO) and deoxygenated (HbR) hemoglobin following neuronal activation [45]. It has been increasingly used in studying the hemodynamics of healthy older adults, and visuospatial working memory processing [20, 46]. Previous studies have shown that increased HbO is associated with increased cognitive demand in younger and older adults [11, 30, 47], suggesting that fNIRS is a reliable and sensitive tool in estimating cognitive effort. In addition, fNIRS studies on visual memory span tasks have found increased HbO on bilateral sides of the ventrolateral and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [31, 32]. Besides, higher cognitive demand of the visual memory span task was associated with higher HbO in the prefrontal cortex in both younger adults [31] and older adults with mild cognitive impairment [30]. These findings suggest that the difference in the amount of cognitive effort exerted at different cognitive task loading between high- and low-performing older adults can be estimated by measuring the changes in prefrontal hemodynamics during the visual memory span task using fNIRS.
The present study aimed to understand the change in activation patterns underlying age-related working memory decline. The cognitive effort was estimated in terms of hemodynamics in bilateral prefrontal regions using fNIRS when participants were performing the visual memory span task. The present study first compared the difference in cognitive effort between younger and older adults. It was hypothesized that older adults scored lower than younger adults in the visual memory span task, together with higher HbO when the cognitive demand of the task was high, suggesting compensatory processing. The present study further explored the difference in activation patterns between high-performing and low-performing older adults. It was anticipated that two different activation patterns were observed between the two groups, representing successful and unsuccessful compensatory responses.
Methods
Participants
Ninety participants were recruited in this study. The younger adult group consisted of 45 undergraduate students aged from 18 to 22 years, whereas the older adult group consisted of 45 young-old to old-old adults aged from 50 to 85 years. To be eligible, participants must understand Chinese and have a normal or corrected-to-normal vision. Participants with any reported history of head injury, neurological or psychiatric disorders, or physical disabilities that affect task performance (e.g., color blindness, motor disabilities), were not eligible to participate in the present study. All participants reported no known history of cerebrovascular complications. All younger and 21 older participants reported no comorbidities that could affect vasculature. Out of the 24 remaining participants, six reported diabetes, 11 hypertension, 11 hypercholesterolemia, four hyperglycemia, two palpitations, and one coronary artery disease. In analyzing the lateralization pattern, two participants in the older adult group and three in the younger adult group were excluded because their laterality indexes exceeded at least 2 SD above or below the mean laterality index in each group.
All recruited older adults scored below one on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale [48], and below a score of nine on the Functional Activities Questionnaire [49], implying no evidence of dementia. Furthermore, the memory ability of all older adults was within the normal range, defined as obtaining Z-scores above -1.5 based on the age- and education-adjusted normative mean on both the 10-min delayed recall score and the 30-min delayed recall score of the Hong Kong List Learning Test (HKLLT [50]), a standardized verbal memory test widely used in Hong Kong. This study was conducted according to the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association Assembly and approved by the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong-New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committee. All participants provided written informed consent before the study.
Procedures
After obtaining the informed consent, all participants underwent the fNIRS session. In this session, participants were asked to perform the visual memory span task in the context of fNIRS recording. They were told to sit still and minimize head and body movements to avoid motion artifacts. Their demographic information, including age, gender, and educational level, was also collected.
Visual memory span task
The visual memory span task paradigm was adapted from a previous fNIRS study in older adults, in which increased HbO was observed when the cognitive task demand increased [30]. In this task, each trial started with a control task period that lasted for 10 s. During this period, participants were instructed to attend to a central fixation cross that appeared on the computer screen. After the control task, nine blue square blocks appeared on the computer screen for 1 s. Next, a sequence of blocks was turned yellow, one by one each time, for 1 s. Participants were asked to memorize the sequence of the blue blocks that changed into yellow. After this encoding period, a retrieval period followed. During this period, a “start” cue appeared in the upper right corner, and a “finish” button appeared in the lower right corner. Participants were asked to reproduce the sequence by selecting square blocks in the same order as they were presented using a computer mouse, and then clicking the “Finish” button to complete (Fig. 1a). There were two trials for each span sequence, starting from a sequence of two blocks to seven blocks (Fig. 1b). There were two practice trials for participants to be familiarized themselves with the task. The stimulus presentation was performed using PsychoPy version 2022.2.4 [51]. The task score was calculated as the longest sequence length answered correctly for any one trial out of the two trials per span sequence by the participants. The completion time of each trial was also recorded. Unlike the traditional task version, the task continued even when the participants reached their longest correct span length.
Hemodynamic measures
The prefrontal hemodynamic activity during the visual memory span task was recorded using a 16-channel OEG-SpO2 system (Spectratech Inc., Tokyo, Japan). This device utilizes near-infrared light with a wavelength of 770 and 840 nm to estimate participants’ relative HbO based on the modified Beer-Lambert law [52]. The sensor consisted of six sources and six detectors arranged alternative in a 2 × 6 matrix (Fig. 2), with a source-detector separation of 3 cm. The center of the bottom probe was placed on Fpz according to the international 10/20 system. The sampling rate of this device was 12.21 Hz.
fNIRS data preprocessing
The collected intensity data was converted into HomER3 data format for data preprocessing [53]. First, the intensity signal was converted to the optical density changes using the hmR_Intensity2OD function. Next, a 0.1 Hz low-pass filter was applied to remove cardiac artifacts using the hmR_BandpassFilt function. The filtered optical density data was then converted to HbO and HbR changes via the modified Beer-Lambert law implemented in the hmR_OD2Conc function, with the default value of 6 as the differential pathlength factor for both wavelengths. After that, a correlation-based signal improvement (CBSI) was applied using the hmrR_MotionCorrectCbsi function to improve the signal quality and reduce noise based on the negative correlation between HbO and HbR [54]. The CBSI-corrected HbO and HbR were baselines corrected with the data during the 10-s control task period before the start of the task using the hmrR_BlockAvg function. The baseline corrected data was averaged across all time points within each trial and then across two trials of each span. Because the HbR signal mirrored the HbO after CBSI, only the HbO data was analyzed.
Given that visual working memory is heavily reliant on the bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [55,56,57,58], the analysis focused on the fNIRS channels in this region, which were divided into the left (channel 1 – 3) and right (channel 14 – 16) prefrontal regions based on previous studies [59,60,61,62]. The HbO data in each channel within the left and right regions were averaged to improve the signal-to-noise ratio [63].
Furthermore, a laterality index was calculated to quantify the lateralization of frontal activation using the modified version of the laterality index (i.e., (AL – AR) / (|AL| +|AR|) [64]), where AL refers to the HbO changes on the left side, and AR refers to the HbO changes on the right. The laterality index is a ratio measure that reflects the differences in activation levels between the two hemispheres in proportion to the overall activation level, ranging from -1 to 1. A positive value indicates left lateralization, and a negative value indicates right lateralization. The laterality index was first calculated for each homologous channel pair (e.g., channel 1 – channel 16, channel 2 – channel 14, channel 3 – channel 15). Then it averaged across pairs to represent the lateralization of frontal activation of each participant.
Statistical analysis
First, the demographic information of the younger adult group and the older adult group was compared. The categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test. For the continuous variables, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was first performed to determine whether the variable violates the normality assumption. An Independent sample t-test was performed if normality was supported, and the Mann-Whitney U test was performed if normality was violated.
The behavioral performance of the visual memory span task, including the score and the reaction, was compared. Mann-Whitney U test was performed to examine the group difference in score. The Chi-square test was performed to determine the association between the group and the passing percentage in each span level. For the completion time, mixed ANOVA was performed to evaluate the group (younger adult group, older adult group) × span (span 2 to span 7) interaction. Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient was computed to determine the association between reaction time and span level. Post-hoc independent t-test was performed to compare the group difference in completion time.
For the HbO data, mixed ANOVA was performed to determine the group (younger adult group, older adult group) × region (left, right prefrontal regions) × span (span 2 to span 7) interaction. Similar to the analysis of completion time, Spearman’s rho correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of span on HbO, and a post-hoc independent sample t-test was performed to evaluate the group difference in HbO in different span levels.
To compare the difference in activation patterns between high- and low-performing older adults, the laterality index was first analyzed with one sample t-test that tested against zero in each group to determine whether both groups were significantly activated during the task. An Independent t-test was performed to evaluate the group difference. Finally, paired t-test was performed in each group to determine whether the HbO was greater on one side than the other. In this analysis, only the laterality index and HbO in the span 6 levels were analyzed because this level differentiates between these two groups.
The above analysis was performed using SPSS 28.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). The significance level was set at 0.05 for all tests (two-tailed).
Results
Sample characteristics
The sample characteristics are presented in Table 1. The age of the older adult group (M = 64.1 years, range = 50.0 – 85.0 years) was significantly older than the younger adult group (M = 19.5 years, range = 18.1 – 21.8 years, Mann-Whitney U = 0, p < 0.001). The two groups did not differ significantly in gender (p = 0.052), and handedness (p = 0.31). It was found that the older adult group was less educated (M = 12.0 years, range = 1 – 19 years) than younger adults (M = 13.8 years, range = 12 – 16 years, Mann-Whitney U = 677.5, p = 0.006).
Visual memory span task performance
On average, the older adult group obtained a mean score of 5.4 (SD = 0.9), whereas the younger adult group obtained a mean score of 6.9 (SD = 0.5). The task performance of the two groups was consistent with previous studies in that healthy older adults usually obtain a score of 5 on average [36], and healthy younger adults usually obtain a score of 6 to 7 on average [34, 42]. In the current sample, the younger adult group significantly outperformed the older adult group (Mann-Whitney U = 243.0, p < 0.001). Table 2 shows the percentage of participants passing the various span level. The Chi-squared test showed significant results, χ2(5) = 613.3, p < 0.001, suggesting that age was associated with different passing frequencies across spans. Specifically, it was found that most of the younger adults could remember seven spans; only four participants did not pass this level. However, 37 older adults did not pass this level. In addition, less than half of the older adults (n = 16) passed span level 6, and more than half (n = 29) failed. Further analysis was conducted to examine the HbO activation pattern associated with this difference in task performance, and the results will be shown at the end of the results section.
The completion time at each span level was also analyzed. Mixed ANOVA was performed to evaluate the group × span interaction. The result is presented in Fig. 3. The results showed a significant main effect of span, F(2.6, 228.5) = 182.8, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.68. It was found that the younger adult group showed significant linear (F(1, 44) = 393.44, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.90) and quadratic trend (F(1, 44) = 20.60, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.32) in completion time. The significant trends also appeared in the older adult group (linear contrast: F(1, 44) = 211.08, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.83; quadratic contrast: F(1, 44) = 15.66, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.26). Besides, there was a significant main effect of group, F(1, 88) = 46.0, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.34, with the older adult group showing a significantly slower completion time than the younger adult group (older adults: M = 9.3 s, SD = 2.5 s; younger adults: M = 6.5 s, SD = 1.1 s; p < 0.001). Finally, the group × span interaction was also significant, F(2.6, 228.5) = 15.3, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.15. The between-group comparison revealed that older adults showed significantly longer completion time at all span levels (t = 5.1 – 6.2, p < 0.001, d = 1.1 – 1.3). The significant interaction suggested that the group difference in completion time increased as the span level increased. Older adults had to make an extra effort to complete the task, especially when the demand was high.
Changes in HbO of younger adults and older adults
Next, the HbO changes during the visual memory span task in each span level were compared between the two groups. Mixed ANOVA was performed to investigate the interaction between group, region, and span level in the changes in HbO. The results showed that the main effect of region, the group × region interaction, the group × span interaction, and the group × region × span interaction was not significant, p = 0.22 – 0.54. Therefore, the HbO was averaged across regions for further interpretation of the group × span interaction. There was a significant main effect of span, F(5, 84) = 38.3, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.70. It was found that the older adult group showed significant linear (F(1, 44) = 114.21, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.72) and quadratic trend (F(1, 44) = 7.59, p = 0.008, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.15) in HbO. These significant trends were also observed in the younger adult group (linear contrast: F(1, 44) = 60.08, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.58; quadratic contrast: F(1, 44) = 6.87, p = 0.012, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.14). In addition, there was also a significant group × span interaction, F(5, 84) = 5.8, p < 0.001, \({\eta }_{p}^{2}\) = 0.26. The post-hoc comparison revealed that the older adult group exhibited a higher HbO than the younger adult group in span 6 level (old: M = 1.4 µM, SD = 1.0 µM; young: M = 1.0 µM, SD = 0.87 µM; t(88) = 2.4, p = 0.020, d = 0.50), and span 7 level (old: M = 1.9 µM, SD = 1.2 µM; young: M = 1.2 µM, SD = 0.94 µM; t(81.8) = 2.9, p = 0.005, d = 1.1, Fig. 4). The significant difference in HbO was observed in both left and right prefrontal regions. Specifically, the older adult group exhibited a higher HbO in the left region at span 6 level, t(88) = 2.59, p = 0.011, d = 0.55, and at span 7 level, t(88) = 2.78, p = 0.007, d = 0.59, and in the right region at span 7 level, t(88) = 2.67, p = 0.009, d = 0.56. No significant group difference in HbO changes in the other span levels (i.e., span 2 to span 5), p ≥ 0.15. The main effect of the group was not significant, p = 0.51. The results suggest that compared to the younger adult group, the older adult group exhibited a higher HbO only during trials with higher cognitive demand, indicating more effortful processing during the difficult level.
Average HbO in bilateral prefrontal regions of the visual memory task in the younger adult group (n = 45) and the older adult group (n = 45) at each span level. The error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean. The asterisks represent the significance levels of group differences in HbO. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
As mentioned, it was found that the education level was lower in the older adult group. However, education level was not significantly correlated with the HbO in either span 6 (ρ = 0.006, p = 0.96) or span 7 levels (ρ = 0.061, p = 0.57) in the current sample, suggesting that education was less likely to explain the significant group difference in HbO in span 6 and span 7 level.
Activation pattern between high- and low-performing older adults
In the span 6 level, 35.6% of the older adults could remember 6 spans and 64.4% failed to do so. Using the accuracy in this level as a cut-off, the older adults were split into high-performing older adults, who have achieved similar visual memory span task performance as younger adults (i.e., answer correctly in span 6), and low-performing older adults (i.e., failed to complete span 6 correctly). There was no significant age difference between the low-performing older adults (n = 28) and the high-performing older adults (n = 15), p = 0.13.
The difference in activation pattern was then explored between these two groups. First, the laterality index was compared (Fig. 5). One sample t-test showed that the low-performing older adults had a significant left lateralization, t(27) = 3.2, p = 0.004, d = 0.60, whereas the high-performing older adults had a significant right lateralization, t(14) = 2.5, p = 0.026, d = 0.47. Furthermore, the independent sample t-test showed that the high-performing older adults had a significantly smaller laterality index than did the incorrect group, t(41) = 3.9, p < 0.001, d = 1.2, suggesting that the correct group had significantly greater right lateralization than did the low-performing older adults.
Laterality index in span 6 level in low- (n = 28) and high-performing older adults (n = 15). A positive value indicates left lateralization, whereas a negative value indicates right lateralization. The asterisks above each error bar represent the significance level of one sample t-test again zero. In contrast, the asterisks above the square brackets represent a significant difference between the two groups. The error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001
Next, the mean HbO changes within the left and right prefrontal regions in the span 6 level were also compared. One sample t-test showed that both groups exhibited significantly higher HbO against zero (p < 0.001), suggesting that bilateral prefrontal cortices were significantly activated in both groups. Consistently with the results observed in the laterality index, the low-performing older adults exhibited greater HbO increases on the left region than the right (right: M = 1.3 µM, SD = 0.90 µM; left: M = 1.6 µM, SD = 1.1 µM; t(27) = 2.4, p = 0.026, d = 0.45, Fig. 6a). By contrast, the high-performing older adults exhibited greater HbO increases on the right region than the left (right: M = 1.8 µM, SD = 1.2 µM; left: M = 1.5 µM, SD = 1.0 µM; t(14) = 2.6, p = 0.022, d = 0.67, Fig. 6b). There was no significant between-group difference in mean HbO changes in both prefrontal regions (p ≥ 0.11). The results suggest that the high-performing older adults demonstrated successful compensatory processing by exhibiting significantly higher lateralized activation in the right prefrontal region.
Prefrontal activation maps showing the HbO concentration changes (in µM) in span 6 level of the visual memory span task in A low- (n = 28), B high-performing older adults (n = 15), and C younger adults (n = 42). Data from individual channels were used in creating all activation maps. Red color represents greater activation, whereas blue color represents less activation. It was found that the low-performing older adults showed significantly greater activation in the left prefrontal region than the right region (p = 0.026), whereas the high-performing older adults showed significantly greater activation in the right region than the left region (p = 0.022). The younger adult group also showed significantly greater activation in the right region (p = 0.047)
Consistently, the high-performing older adults responded faster than the low-performing older adults at span 6 level (high-performing: M = 9.7 s, SD = 2.0 s; low-performing: M = 12.6 s, SD = 4.5 s; t(41.8) = 3.0, p = 0.004, d = 0.84), which provides converging evidence suggesting that the high-performing older adults were more cognitively efficient than the low-performing older adults. It is noted that both groups did not differ in terms of memory ability. Specifically, the group differences in the 10-min delayed recall (high-performing: M = 9.6, SD = 3.8; low-performing: M = 8.9, SD = 2.7; t(23.8) = 0.62, p = 0.54), and the 30-min delayed recall (high-performing: M = 9.1, SD = 3.6; low-performing: M = 8.7, SD = 2.8; t(43) = 0.42, p = 0.68) of the HKLLT were not significant. Therefore, the significant difference in lateralized activation on the right region between the high- and low-performing older adults was less likely due to group differences in memory ability.
The activation pattern in younger adults
After understanding the activation pattern between high- and low-performing older adults, the same analysis was performed in younger adults to determine whether there was lateralization observed in the younger adult group as well. One sample t-test showed that the younger adult group had significant right lateralization, t(41) = 2.73, p = 0.009, d = 0.42. Furthermore, there was a significantly greater HbO increases on the right region than the left region in the span 6 level (right: M = 1.17 µM, SD = 0.84 µM; left: M = 0.98 µM, SD = 0.97 µM; t(41) = 2.05, p = 0.047, d = 0.32, Fig. 6c). Therefore, the activation pattern in the high-performing older adults was more closely resemble the younger adult group, but not the low-performing older adults.
Discussion
The present study utilized fNIRS to investigate the age-related compensatory mechanism by measuring the prefrontal hemodynamics during the visual memory span task. It was found that older adults performed poorly as compared to younger adults. In addition, older adults showed a higher prefrontal activation than younger adults only when the cognitive loading of the trial was high (i.e., the span 6 and 7 levels, in which less than half of participants answered them correctly). The older participants demonstrated a compensatory attempt by putting much cognitive effort into co** with the high cognitive task demand, consistent with previous findings [15, 16]. More importantly, the present study explored further the difference in activation patterns associated with higher visuospatial working memory performance in older adults. It was found that high-performing older adults, who performed similarly to the younger adults, exhibited more right-lateralized activation when the cognitive demand was high. In contrast, the low-performing older adults exhibited more lateralized activation, but to the left hemisphere. Given that visuospatial working memory is commonly known as specialized in the right hemisphere [65], the significant difference in lateralized pattern suggests that high-performing older adults performed better by cognitive resources allocation to the specialized brain region. In contrast, the low-performing older adults failed to put much cognitive effort because of efficiently recruiting cognitive resources in the opposite region. Therefore, together with the shorter reaction time in high-performing older adults, commonly known as an index of cognitive efficiency, it is believed that the high-performing older adults were more cognitively efficient.
Unlike previous studies that utilized the 50th percentile of the n-back performance as a cutoff score to differentiate the high- and low-performing older adults [27,28,29], the present study attempted to differentiate the two groups using the visual memory span task, which was modified from a standardized neuropsychological test used in the clinical setting. Given that younger adults usually obtained a score of 6 to 7 in the task [34, 42], the high-performing older adults were believed to preserve an intact working memory function similar to the younger adults because these older adults could correctly complete span 6. Some could even recall seven spans correctly. Therefore, the visual memory span task could impose an absolute cut-off to differentiate between the high- and low-performing older adults, making the results comparable across studies. Besides, the n-back task was prone to a ceiling or floor effect when the recruited sample consisted of a wide range of working memory abilities. On the contrary, the visual memory span task was found suitable for samples with different levels of working memory abilities, such as younger adults and older adults with normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia [34, 36, 39,40,41]. Therefore, the visual memory span task was employed in the present study. The present findings support the use of this experimental paradigm in understanding how an individual makes his cognitive efforts in handling cognitive tasks with increasing cognitive loading.
The hemodynamic responses measured by the fNIRS rely on the neurovascular coupling mechanism, which describes the relationship between neuronal activity and blood flow [45]. A previous study has reported an age-related decline in neurovascular coupling [66]; it is unclear whether the higher HbO levels observed in older adults in the present study were due to the difference in task-related neural activity or the age-related reduction in neurovascular coupling. If the observed difference was due to the difference in neurovascular coupling, there should be a difference between older adults with preserved and declined neurovascular coupling. Assuming that older adults with comorbidities that could affect vasculature have relatively declined neurovascular coupling compared to those without [67, 68], these two groups did not significantly differ in terms of the score of the visual memory span task (p = 0.41), and the task-related hemodynamic response (p = 0.23 – 0.65). Therefore, the effect of neurovascular coupling on the task-related hemodynamic response difference between younger and older adults observed in the present study appeared small, if not negligible. Despite this, future studies may consider the age-related difference in neurovascular coupling when understanding the age effect on brain activation.
There have been conflicting results regarding the age-related changes in brain activation. While some reported an increased activation in older adults [15,16,17,18], others have reported a decreased activation [11, 12]. In addition, there has been a debate regarding the Compensation-Related Utilization of Neural Circuits Hypothesis (CRUNCH) model. This compensation model posits that older adults exhibit higher activation when cognitive task demands are low to compensate for age-related decline in cognitive processing. Furthermore, they exhibit lower activation when cognitive task demands are too high, which exceeds their cognitive capacities. Previous studies have reported findings that support this model (e.g., [69]). However, inconsistent with what the CRUNCH model predicts, the present study found that the older adults exhibited significantly higher HbO at the most difficult level (i.e., span 7), which was sufficiently challenging as only 17.8% of older participants could perform correctly. This finding is consistent with a previous fMRI study that failed to replicate the CRUNCH effect [70]. The mixed findings regarding age-related activation and different models of compensation suggest that there may be moderators that affect age-related brain activation, such as the differences in neurovascular coupling between younger and older adults, as mentioned before [66, 71].
Aging has become a serious global health issue because the population of older adults has been increasing at an accelerated rate. It was estimated that the world’s population of people aged 60 years and older will increase from 1 billion in 2020 to 1.4 billion in 2030, doubling to 2.1 billion in 2050 [72]. Therefore, develo** an effective intervention that slows down the cognitive decline or maintains the cognitive function of older adults will be beneficial to relieve the social and economic burdens brought on by the aging problem. In the present study, the higher neural efficiency observed among high-performing older adults suggests the possibility of improving cognitive function by enhancing the neural efficiency of older adults. Brain stimulation techniques such as transcranial direct current stimulation [73], transcranial alternative current stimulation [74], and transcranial photobiomodulation [75] have been recently considered as potential effective interventions that alter brain functions. Future work may explore whether these methods can enhance neural efficiency and slow down age-related cognitive decline in healthy older adults.
Several limitations were noted in this study. For instance, the present study included a wide range of older participants aged between 50 and 85 years. Besides, the older adult group in the present study was assessed for possible dementia and memory impairment. Future studies may consider recruiting a more homogeneous aged group with a narrower age range and with a more comprehensive cognitive assessment differentiating participants with different levels of cognitive function (e.g., normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia).
In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that aging is associated with deterioration in working memory and extra cognitive effort when the performing task is cognitively demanding. Furthermore, it was also found that high-performing older adults engaged in successful compensatory processing by exhibiting higher activation in the right prefrontal region, a region specialized in visuospatial working memory. Low-performing older adults, however, showed higher activation in the left prefrontal region, suggesting an unsuccessful compensatory attempt by putting much cognitive effort into an unspecialized region.
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Harada CN, Love MCN, Triebel KL. Normal cognitive aging. Clin Geriatr Med. 2013;29:737–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2013.07.002.
Salthouse TA. Trajectories of normal cognitive aging. Psychol Aging. 2019;34:17–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000288.
Baddeley A. Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63:1–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422.
Jagust W. Vulnerable neural systems and the borderland of brain aging and neurodegeneration. Neuron. 2013;77:219–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.01.002.
Klencklen G, Lavenex PB, Brandner C, Lavenex P. Working memory decline in normal aging: Memory load and representational demands affect performance. Learn Motiv. 2017;60:10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2017.09.002.
Pliatsikas C, Veríssimo J, Babcock L, Pullman MY, Glei DA, Weinstein M, Goldman N, Ullman MT. Working memory in older adults declines with age, but is modulated by sex and education. Q J Exp Psychol. 2019;72:1308–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021818791994.
Wilson RS, Beckett LA, Barnes LL, Schneider JA, Bach J, Evans DA, Bennett DA. Individual differences in rates of change in cognitive abilities of older persons. Psychol Aging. 2002;17:179–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.17.2.179.
Habib R, Nyberg L, Nilsson L. Cognitive and non-cognitive factors contributing to the longitudinal identification of successful older adults in the Betula study. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2007;14:257–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580600582412.
Lin F, Ren P, Mapstone M, Meyers SP, Porsteinsson AP, Baran TM. The cingulate cortex of older adults with excellent memory capacity. Cortex. 2017;86:83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.11.009.
Sun J, Zhao X, Zhou J, Dang X, Zhu S, Liu L, Zhou Z. Preliminary analysis of volume-based resting-state functional MRI characteristics of successful aging in China. J Alzheimers Dis. 2022;91:767–78. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-220780.
Causse M, Chua ZK, Peysakhovich V, Del Campo N, Matton N. Mental workload and neural efficiency quantified in the prefrontal cortex using fNIRS. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5222. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05378-x.
Wijeakumar S, Magnotta VA, Spencer JP. Modulating perceptual complexity and load reveals degradation of the visual working memory network in ageing. Neuroimage. 2017;157:464–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.019.
Cabeza R, Daselaar SM, Dolcos F, Prince SE, Budde M, Nyberg L. Task-independent and task-specific age effects on brain activity during working memory, visual attention and episodic retrieval. Cereb cortex. 2004;14:364–75. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhg133.
Holtzer R, Rakitin BC, Steffener J, Flynn J, Kumar A, Stern Y. Age effects on load-dependent brain activations in working memory for novel material. Brain Res. 2009;1249:148–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.10.009.
Agbangla NF, Audiffren M, Pylouste J, Albinet CT. Working memory, cognitive load and cardiorespiratory fitness: testing the CRUNCH model with near-infrared spectroscopy. Brain Sci. 2019;9:38. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci9020038.
Oboshi Y, Kikuchi M, Shimizu Y, Yoshimura Y, Hiraishi H, Okada H, Magata Y, Ouchi Y. Pre-task prefrontal activation during cognitive processes in aging: A near-infrared spectroscopy study. PLoS One. 2014;9:e98779. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098779.
Vermeij A, Abeelen ASMD, Kessels RPC, Van Beek AH, Claassen JA. Very-low-frequency oscillations of cerebral hemodynamics and blood pressure are affected by aging and cognitive load. Neuroimage. 2014;85:608–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.107.
Yamanaka K, Tomioka H, Kawasaki S, Noda Y, Yamagata B, Iwanami A, Mimura M. Effect of parietal transcranial magnetic stimulation on spatial working memory in healthy elderly persons - comparison of near infrared spectroscopy for young and elderly. PLoS One. 2014;9:e102306. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102306.
Grady CL. The cognitive neuroscience of ageing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13:491–505. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3256.
Yeung M, Chan AS. A systematic review of the application of functional near-infrared spectroscopy to the study of cerebral hemodynamics in healthy aging. Neuropsychol Rev. 2021;31:139–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-020-09455-3.
Zahodne LB, Reuter-Lorenz PA. Compensation and brain aging: A review and analysis of evidence. In: Samanez-Larkin GR, editors. The aging brain: Functional adaptation across adulthood. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association; 2019. pp. 185-216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000143-008.
Reuter-Lorenz PA, Cappell KA. Neurocognitive aging and the compensation hypothesis. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2008;17:177–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00570.x.
Schneider-Garces N, Gordon BA, Brumback-Peltz CR, Shin E, Lee Y, Sutton BP, Maclin EL, Gratton G, Fabiani M. Span CRUNCH, and beyond: Working memory capacity and the aging brain. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010;22:655–69. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21230.
Cabeza R, Anderson ND, Locantore JK, McIntosh AR. Aging gracefully: compensatory brain activity in high-performing older adults. Neuroimage. 2002;17:1394–402. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2002.1280.
Nagel IE, Preuschhof C, Li S, Nyberg L, Bäckman L, Lindenberger U, Heekeren HR. Performance level modulates adult age differences in brain activation during spatial working memory. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:22552–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908238106.
Talamonti D, Montgomery C, Clark D, Bruno D. Age-related prefrontal cortex activation in associative memory: An fNIRS pilot study. NeuroImage. 2020;222:117223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117223.
Vermeij A, Van Beek AH, Reijs BL, Claassen JA, Kessels RPC. An exploratory study of the effects of spatial working-memory load on prefrontal activation in low- and high-performing elderly. Front Aging Neurosci. 2014;6:303. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2014.00303.
Sala-Llonch R, Arenaza-Urquijo EM, Valls-Pedret C, Vidal-Piñeiro D, Zetterberg H, Junqué C, Bartrés-Faz D. Dynamic functional reorganizations and relationship with working memory performance in healthy aging. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012;6:152. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00152.
Vaqué-Alcázar L, Sala-Llonch R, Abellaneda-Pérez K, Coll-Padros N, Valls-Pedret C, Zetterberg H, Ros E, Bartrés-Faz D. Functional and structural correlates of working memory performance and stability in healthy older adults. Brain Struct Funct. 2020;225:375–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-019-02009-1.
Chan AS, Lee T, Hamblin MR, Cheung M. Photobiomodulation enhances memory processing in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study. J Alzheimers Dis. 2021;83:1471–80. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-201600.
Lancia S, Cofini V, Carrieri M, Ferrari M, Quaresima V. Are ventrolateral and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices involved in the computerized Corsi block-tap** test execution? An fNIRS study. Neurophotonics. 2018;5:011019. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.nph.5.1.011019.
Panico F, De Marco S, Sagliano L, D’Olimpio F, Grossi D, Trojano L. Brain hemodynamic response in examiner–examinee dyads during spatial short-term memory task: an fNIRS study. Exp Brain Res. 2021;239:1607–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-021-06073-0.
Corsi PM. Human memory and the medial temporal region of the brain. Thesis, McGill Univ. 1972.
Claessen MHG, Van Der Ham IJM, Van Zandvoort MJE. Computerization of the standard Corsi block-tap** task affects its underlying cognitive concepts: A pilot study. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2015;22:180–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2014.892488.
Liebermann-Jordanidis H, Roheger M, Boosfeld L, Franklin J, Kalbe E. Which test is the best to assess visuo-cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson’s disease with mild cognitive impairment and dementia? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Parkinsons Dis. 2022;12:1749–82. https://doi.org/10.3233/jpd-223238.
Monaco M, Costa AC, Caltagirone C, Carlesimo GA. Forward and backward span for verbal and visuo-spatial data: standardization and normative data from an Italian adult population. Neurol Sci. 2013;34:749–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-012-1130-x.
Siddi S, Preti A, Lara E, Brébion G, Vila R, Iglesias MJ, Cuevas-Esteban J, López-Carrilero R, Butjosa A, Haro JM. Comparison of the touch-screen and traditional versions of the Corsi block-tap** test in patients with psychosis and healthy controls. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20:329. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02716-8.
Wang Z, **g J, Igarashi K, Fan L, Yang S, Li Y, ** Y. Executive function predicts the visuospatial working memory in autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Autism Res. 2018;11:1148–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1967.
Cosentino E, Palmer K, Della Pietà C, Mitolo M, Meneghello F, Levedianos G, Iaia V, Venneri A. Association between gait, cognition, and gray matter volumes in mild cognitive impairment and healthy controls. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2020;34:231–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/wad.0000000000000371.
De Simone MS, Perri R, Fadda L, Caltagirone C, Carlesimo GA. Predicting progression to Alzheimer’s disease in subjects with amnestic mild cognitive impairment using performance on recall and recognition tests. J Neurol. 2019;266:102–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-018-9108-0.
De Tollis M, De Simone MS, Perri R, Fadda L, Caltagirone C, Carlesimo GA. Verbal and spatial memory spans in mild cognitive impairment. Acta Neurol Scand. 2021;144:383–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.13470.
Pagulayan KF, Busch RM, Medina KL, Bartok JA, Krikorian R. Developmental normative data for the Corsi block-tap** task. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006;28:1043–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390500350977.
Nemmi F, Boccia M, Piccardi L, Galati G, Guariglia C. Segregation of neural circuits involved in spatial learning in reaching and navigational space. Neuropsychologia. 2013;51:1561–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.03.031.
Toepper M, Gebhardt H, Beblo T, Thomas C, Driessen M, Bischoff M, Blecker CR, Vaitl D, Sammer G. Functional correlates of distractor suppression during spatial working memory encoding. Neuroscience. 2010;165:1244–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.11.019.
Pinti P, Tachtsidis I, De Hamilton AFC, Hirsch J, Aichelburg C, Gilbert SJ, Burgess PW. The present and future use of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for cognitive neuroscience. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2020;1464:5–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13948.
Llana T, Fernández-Baizán C, Méndez-López M, Fidalgo C, Méndez M. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy in the neuropsychological assessment of spatial memory: A systematic review. Acta Psychol. 2022;224:103525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103525.
Csipo T, Lipecz A, Mukli P, Bahadli D, Abdulhussein O, Owens CD, Tarantini S, Hand RA, Yabluchanska V, Kellawan JM, Sorond FA, James JA, Csiszar A, Ungvari Z, Yabluchanskiy A. Increased cognitive workload evokes greater neurovascular coupling responses in healthy young adults. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0250043. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250043.
Morris JC. Clinical Dementia Rating: A reliable and valid diagnostic and staging measure for dementia of the Alzheimer type. Int Psychogeriatr. 1997;9:173–6. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610297004870.
Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki T, Harrah CH, Chance JM, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol. 1982;37:323–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/37.3.323.
Chan AS. The Hong Kong List Learning Test. 2nd ed. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong; 2006.
Peirce JW. PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python. J Neurosci Methods. 2007;162:8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017.
Delpy DT, Cope M, Van Der Zee P, Arridge SR, Wray S, Wyatt J. Estimation of optical pathlength through tissue from direct time of flight measurement. Phys Med Biol. 1988;33:1433–42. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/33/12/008.
Huppert TJ, Diamond SG, Franceschini MA, Boas DA. HomER: a review of time-series analysis methods for near-infrared spectroscopy of the brain. Appl Opt. 2009;48:D280–98. https://doi.org/10.1364/ao.48.00d280.
Cui X, Bray S, Reiss AL. Functional near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) signal improvement based on negative correlation between oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin dynamics. Neuroimage. 2010;49:3039–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.11.050.
Barbey AK, Koenigs M, Grafman J. Dorsolateral prefrontal contributions to human working memory. Cortex. 2013;49:1195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2012.05.022.
Funahashi S. Working memory in the prefrontal cortex. Brain Sci. 2017;7:49. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci7050049.
Kronovsek T, Hermand E, Berthoz A, Castilla A, Gallou-Guyot M, Daviet J, Perrochon A. Age-related decline in visuo-spatial working memory is reflected by dorsolateral prefrontal activation and cognitive capabilities. Behav Brain Res. 2021;398:112981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2020.112981.
Nissim NR, O’Shea A, Bryant VM, Porges EC, Cohen RC, Woods AJ. Frontal structural neural correlates of working memory performance in older adults. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;8:328. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00328.
Chan AS, Lee T, Hamblin MR, Cheung M. Photoneuromodulation makes a difficult cognitive task less arduous. Sci Rep. 2021;11:13688. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93228-2.
Jeong E, Ryu H, Shin J, Kwon GH, Jo G, Lee JH. High oxygen exchange to music indicates auditory distractibility in acquired brain injury: An fNIRS study with a vector-based phase analysis. Sci Rep. 2018;8:16737. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-35172-2.
Morita A, Morishima Y, Rackham DW. Right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation during a time production task: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study. Asian J Neurosci. 2015;189060. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/189060.
Yasumura A, Kokubo N, Yamamoto H, Yasumura Y, Nakagawa E, Kaga M, Hiraki K, Inagaki M. Neurobehavioral and hemodynamic evaluation of Stroop and reverse Stroop interference in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Brain Dev. 2014;36:97–106. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102306.
Plichta MM, Herrmann M, Baehne CG, Ehlis A, Richter M, Emmelkamp PMG, Fallgatter AJ. Event-related functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS): Are the measurements reliable? Neuroimage. 2006;31:116–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.008.
Seghier ML. Laterality index in functional MRI: methodological issues. Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;26:594–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2007.10.010.
Smith EE, John J. Working memory: A view from neuroimaging. Cogn Psychol. 1997;33:5–42. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1997.0658.
Csipo T, Mukli P, Lipecz A, Tarantini S, Bahadli D, Abdulhussein O, Owens C, Kiss T, Balasubramanian P, Nyúl-Tóth Á, Hand RA. Assessment of age-related decline of neurovascular coupling responses by functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in humans. Geroscience. 2019;41:495–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-019-00122-x.
Girouard H, Iadecola C. Neurovascular coupling in the normal brain and in hypertension, stroke, and Alzheimer disease. J Appl Physiol. 2006;100:328–35. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00966.2005.
Monteiro A, Castro P, Pereira G, Ferreira C, Sorond F, Milstead A, Higgins JP, Polónia J, Azevedo E. Neurovascular coupling is impaired in hypertensive and diabetic subjects without symptomatic cerebrovascular disease. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:728007. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.728007.
Causse M, Chua ZK, Rémy F. Influences of age, mental workload, and flight experience on cognitive performance and prefrontal activity in private pilots: a fNIRS study. Sci Rep. 2019;9:7688. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44082-w.
Jamadar SD. The CRUNCH model does not account for load-dependent changes in visuospatial working memory in older adults. Neuropsychologia. 2020;142:107446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107446.
Agbangla NF, Audiffren M, Albinet CT. Use of near-infrared spectroscopy in the investigation of brain activation during cognitive aging: a systematic review of an emerging area of research. Ageing Res Rev. 2017;38:52–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2017.07.003.
World Health Organization. Ageing and health. 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health/. Accessed 3 Apr 2023.
Summers JJ, Kang N, Cauraugh JH. Does transcranial direct current stimulation enhance cognitive and motor functions in the ageing brain? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Res Rev. 2016;25:42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2015.11.004.
Booth SJ, Taylor JR, Brown LJ, Pobric G. The effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation on memory performance in healthy adults: a systematic review. Cortex. 2022;147:112–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.12.001.
Lee T, Ding Z, Chan AS. Can transcranial photobiomodulation improve cognitive function? A systematic review of human studies. Ageing Res Rev. 2022;83:101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2022.101786.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Quin Chan, Christy Cheung, Samantha Mui, Sophia Sze, and Natalie Yang for their assistance in the participant recruitment and data collection for this study.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, Tl., Ding, Z. & Chan, A.S. Prefrontal hemodynamic features of older adults with preserved visuospatial working memory function. GeroScience 45, 3513–3527 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-023-00862-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-023-00862-x