The study by Herlitz et al.
+27 included subjects with mild (
n = 10; mean MMSE score, 24.5), moderate (
n = 10; mean MMSE score, 16.6), and severe AD (
n = 10; mean MMSE score, 6.6) as well as healthy control subjects (
n = 10; mean MMSE score, 29.7). All subjects experienced, in a single learning training session, five different encoding conditions: in the verbal encoding condition, the subject listened to a list of nouns read by the experimenter and read the corresponding words on cards, one at a time; in the object encoding condition, the subject was presented with the actual objects and had to name them; in the semantic encoding condition, the subject was presented with the objects and was asked to answer questions about their functional use; in the semantic/motoric condition, the subject was presented with the objects and asked to motorically demonstrate how to use them; and in the motoric condition, the subject had to use presented objects according to the experimenter-provided instructions. The goal of the study was to assess which encoding condition provided the best retention and recall performance, using the free and cued recall paradigms. After each condition, subjects were asked to free-recall all items they could remember during a 2-minute period. A cued recall was then immediately carried out whereby the semantic category names were provided as cues. Using the free recall paradigm, the patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD recalled, respectively, from 35% to 40% (best performance in the object condition), from 15% to 30% (best performance in the verbal condition), and from 0% to 5% of the items (best performance in the verbal condition). Using the cued recall paradigm, the patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD recalled, respectively, from 40% to 60%, from 20% to 35%, and from 2% to 20% of the items (best performance in the motoric condition). Although the recall performance of subjects with AD significantly benefited (
P<0.001) from the cued recall paradigm, there was no significant effect of the encoding conditions in subjects with mild and moderate dementia. Only the patients with severe AD significantly improved their cued recall performance in the motoric condition (
P<0.01). In comparison, the control subjects recalled 60% to 80% of the items using the free recall paradigm and 70% to 90% of the items using the cued recall paradigm. The controls significantly improved their performance in the semantic and semantic/motoric conditions as compared with the verbal condition (
P<0.01). The authors concluded that patients with mild AD are able to utilize cues to increase retrieval performance after poor (i.e., verbal) as well as rich (i.e., semantic) encoding conditions; that patients with moderate AD are able to benefit from cues after all forms of encoding, with the exception of pure verbal encoding; and that patients with severe AD are able to utilize cues only after motoric encoding. There was no longitudinal follow-up of the learning training.