This document summarizes a study that tested a novel web-based cognitive training exercise called "Rhythm Recall" to enhance auditory perceptual learning and multimodal integration. The study involved over 3,000 participants ranging from 20-100 years old. Key findings include: 1) Both older and younger individuals showed improved performance with training, though older adults required more training to benefit similarly from audiovisual cues. 2) While older individuals generally performed worse, both age groups exhibited similar learning rates and were similarly affected by increases in rhythmic complexity and the balance of sensory information. 3) The results support previous findings that older adults' cross-modal integration capacities remain intact even as auditory processing and resistance to interference

1. Wes Jackson1
, Michael Merzenich1,2
, Alit Stark-Inbar1,3
, Tom Van Vleet1,4
1
Posit Science, 2
University of California, San Francisco, 3
University of California, Berkeley, 4
Department of Veteran Affairs, VA Medical Center, Martinez
INTRODUCTION
A Novel Multimodal Musical Exercise to Enhance
Auditory Perceptual Learning and Memory
Multimodal musical training induces plastic changes in audi-
tory and motor cross-modal regions (Baumann et al., 2007)
and enhances sensorimotor integration (Brochard et al.,
2003), visuospatial skills (Rauscher et al., 1997) and auditory
perceptual learning and memory (Seppanen et al., 2012,
Thaut et al., 2006).
The aim of this pilot study was to test and validate a novel
web and mobile-based cognitive training exercise (”Rhythm
Recall”) designed to enhance multimodal integration and
auditory perceptual learning.
A second goal was to characterize age-dependent differenc-
es in multimodal integration and auditory perceptual learn-
ing using a large cohort of older (60 -100 years, N=1810)
and younger (20-60 years, N=1455) individuals.
AUDIOVISUAL (AV) CUES
AUDITORY-ONLY (A) CUES
Hear & see representation of rhythm
with ticking (A) & blinking (V) metro-
nome as the playhead.
AV cues during response playback
but player must rely on their
memory to reproduce the precise
timing of the sequence.
Stimulus Response
Threshold (# beats) adapts to player performance.
Uninformative visual cues during response & no metronome.
Baumann, S., Koeneke, S., Schmidt, C. F., Meyer, M., Lutz, K., & Jancke, L. (2007). A network for audio–motor coordination in skilled pianists and non-musicians. Brain Research, 1161(0), 65–78.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.05.045
Brochard, R., Dufour, A., & Després, O. (2004). Effect of musical expertise on visuospatial abilities: Evidence from reaction times and mental imagery. Brain and Cognition, 54(2), 103–109.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00264-1
Mishra J., Gazzaley A. (2013). Preserved Discrimination Performance and Neural Processing during Crossmodal Attention in Aging. PLoS ONE 8(11): e81894. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081894
Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., Levine, L. J., Wright, E. L., Dennis, W. R., & Newcomb, R. L. (1997). Music training causes long-term enhancement of preschool children's spatial-temporal reasoning. Neurological Research, 19, 2-8.
Seppänen, M., Hämäläinen, J., Pesonen, A.-K., & Tervaniemi, M. (2012). Music Training Enhances Rapid Neural Plasticity of N1 and P2 Source Activation for Unattended Sounds. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 43.
doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00043
Thaut, M. H., Peterson D. A. and McIntosh, G. C. (2005), Temporal Entrainment of Cognitive Functions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1060: 243–254. doi: 10.1196/annals.1360.017
**
1
2
3
4
1: Baseline 2: Best
N=15082 blocks, p<0.01
Threshold(#beats)
1: Baseline
2: Best
Overall learning
**
**
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
# Config Repeats
N older = 8907 blocks, r = 0.139, p<0.01
N younger = 5356 blocks, r = 0.142, p<0.01
Best
Learning Rate
**
1
2
3
4
40 60 80 100
Age
N=15082 blocks, r=−0.284 p<0.01
Best
Performance by Age
**
**
1
2
3
4
baseline best
Performance
N older = 9458 , N younger = 5624 blocks
Threshold
Baseline vs Best Threshold
Older individuals require additional training in
order to exploit AV cues similar to younger.
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1. AV 2. A
Modality
N older = 562 , N younger = 361
rpt= 3 −4
Best
Performance by Modality
*
**
**
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1. younger 2. older
N older = 562 , N younger = 361
rpt= 3 −4
Best:AV−A
Visual Cue Reliance
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1. AV 2. A
Modality
N older = 450 , N younger = 232
rpt= 5 +
Best
Performance by Modality
n.s.
**
**
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1. younger 2. older
N older = 450 , N younger = 232
rpt= 5 +
Best:AV−A
Visual Cue Reliance
Complexity increases across training:
1: Low complexity = 8th-4th notes
2. Medium complexity = 16th-4th notes
3. High complexity = rests
**
**
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1 2 3
Complexity
N older = 9458 blocks, r = −0.272, p<0.01
N younger = 5624 blocks, r = −0.279, p<0.01
Best
Performance by Rhythmic Complexity
Task Learning & Age Effects
RESULTS
CONCLUSIONS
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
REFERENCES
METHODS
• Assess the influence of Rhythm Recall training on auditory
perceptual acuity, learning and memory in a randomized con-
trolled trial.
• Investigate multimodal training with Rhythm Recall as a clini-
cal intervention for individuals with neuromotor disorders
such as Parkinson’s & Huntington’s Disease or auditory and
verbal learning deficits such as users of cochlear implants.
Age groups are in bins of 20 yrs.
Younger than 60
Older than 60
Legend
n.s. not significant
* p < 0.05
** p < 0.01
• Although older individuals generally underperform com-
pared to younger individuals, they exhibit similar learning
rates and are similarly affected by rhythmic complexity and the
balance of crossmodal information.
• Additionally, older individuals require more training to
derive a similar benefit from crossmodal information as
younger individuals.
These results are consistent with recent studies that show that
although older individuals demonstrate degraded auditory
perceptual processing and greater susceptibility to visual
information interference, their cross-modal integration capaci-
ties are similar to those of younger individuals (Mishra &
`Gazzaley, 2013).Low performance High performance
http://goo.gl/ZR76w9