For Whom (and When) the Time Bell Tolls: Chronotypes and the Synchrony Effect

Circadian rhythms are powerful timekeepers that drive physiological and intellectual functioning throughout the day. These rhythms vary across individuals, with morning chronotypes rising and peaking early in the day and evening chronotypes showing a later rise in arousal, with peaks in the afternoon or evening. Chronotype also varies with age from childhood to adolescence to old age. As a result of these differences, the time of day at which people are best at attending, learning, solving analytical problems, making complex decisions, and even behaving ethically varies. Across studies of attention and memory and a range of allied areas, including academic achievement, judgment and decision-making, and neuropsychological assessment, optimal outcomes are found when performance times align with peaks in circadian arousal, a finding known as the synchrony effect. The benefits of performing in synchrony with one's chronotype (and the costs of not doing so) are most robust for individuals with strong morning or evening chronotypes and for tasks that require effortful, analytical processing or the suppression of distracting information. Failure to take the synchrony effect into consideration may be a factor in issues ranging from replication difficulties to school timing to assessing intellectual disabilities and apparent cognitive decline in aging.

Unsupervised mobile app-based cognitive testing in a population-based study of older adults born 1944

Background

Mobile app-based tools have the potential to yield rapid, cost-effective, and sensitive measures for detecting dementia-related cognitive impairment in clinical and research settings. At the same time, there is a substantial need to validate these tools in real-life settings. The primary aim of this study was thus to evaluate the feasibility, validity, and reliability of mobile app-based tasks for assessing cognitive function in a population-based sample of older adults.

Method

A total of 172 non-demented (Clinical Dementia Rating 0 and 0.5) older participants (aged 76-77) completed two mobile app-based memory tasks-the Mnemonic Discrimination Task for Objects and Scenes (MDT-OS) and the long-term (24 h) delayed Object-In-Room Recall Task (ORR-LDR). To determine the validity of the tasks for measuring relevant cognitive functions in this population, we assessed relationships with conventional cognitive tests. In addition, psychometric properties, including test-retest reliability, and the participants' self-rated experience with mobile app-based cognitive tasks were assessed.

Result

MDT-OS and ORR-LDR were weakly-to-moderately correlated with the Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite (PACC5) (r = 0.3-0.44, p < .001) and with several other measures of episodic memory, processing speed, and executive function. Test-retest reliability was poor-to-moderate for one single session but improved to moderate-to-good when using the average of two sessions. We observed no significant floor or ceiling effects nor effects of education or gender on task performance. Contextual factors such as distractions and screen size did not significantly affect task performance. Most participants deemed the tasks interesting, but many rated them as highly challenging. While several participants reported distractions during tasks, most could concentrate well. However, there were difficulties in completing delayed recall tasks on time in this unsupervised and remote setting.

Conclusion

Our study proves the feasibility of mobile app-based cognitive assessments in a community sample of older adults, demonstrating its validity in relation to conventional cognitive measures and its reliability for repeated measurements over time. To further strengthen study adherence, future studies should implement additional measures to improve task completion on time.

Bridging the Technological Divide: Stigmas and Challenges With Technology in Digital Brain Health Studies of Older Adults

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased adoption of remote assessments in clinical research. However, longstanding stereotypes persist regarding older adults' technology familiarity and their willingness to participate in technology-enabled remote studies. We examined the validity of these stereotypes using a novel technology familiarity assessment (n = 342) and with a critical evaluation of participation factors from an intensive smartphone study of cognition in older adults (n = 445). The technology assessment revealed that older age was strongly associated with less technology familiarity, less frequent engagement with technology, and higher difficulty ratings. Despite this, the majority (86.5%) of older adults elected to participate in the smartphone study and showed exceptional adherence (85.7%). Furthermore, among those enrolled, neither technology familiarity, knowledge, perceived difficulty, nor gender, race, or education were associated with adherence. These results suggest that while older adults remain significantly less familiar with technology than younger generations, with thoughtful study planning that emphasizes participant support and user-centered design, they are willing and capable participants in technology-enabled studies. And once enrolled, they are remarkably adherent.