Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Active versus passive exploration of virtual environments modulates spatial memory in MS patients: a yoked control study

  • Cognitive Dysfunction in MS
  • Published:
The Italian Journal of Neurological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated whether exploration of computer-generated environments can selectively enhance spatial memory in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Fifteen patients and 15 healthy subjects who controlled their movements in a virtual house using a joystick recalled the spatial layout of the environments better than 15 patients and 15 controls who merely watched the active participants' progress. Among passive subjects, only healthy controls did significantly better than active participants in the recall of virtual objects. There were no significant differences between active and passive participants' recall of correct object locations in the virtual environments. MS patients' recall of the spatial layout and of the virtual objects was significantly worse than that of healthy subjects, but patients' data did not correlate with traditional neuropsychological measures of spatial memory. It is suggested that virtual reality can be used in MS patients to assess aspects of spatial memory that are not measured by traditional tests.

Sommario

Questo studio ha esaminato come la modalità attiva o passiva di esplorazione di ambienti possa influenzare differenti aspetti della memoria visuo-spaziale di soggetti sani e pazienti con sclerosi multipla (SM), nell'ipotesi the la prima modalitd favorisca Pacquisizione di informazioni topografiche mentre la seconda quella di informazioni topologiche. 15 pazienti e 15 soggetti sani the hanno esplorato attivamente un appartamento virtuale hanno memorizzato la sua pianta topografica meglio di 15 pazienti e di 15 soggetti sani the hanno osservato passivamente il percorso dei partecipanti attivi. Tra i soggetti passivi, solo i controlli sani hanno ricordato il contenuto degli ambienti esplorati significativamente meglio dei partecipanti attivi. Non sono emerse significative differenze tra partecipanti attivi e passivi concernenti il ricordo della posizione the gli oggetti avevano negli ambienti virtuali. 1 pazienti con SM hanno avuto prestazioni inferiori paragonate a quelle dei controlli sani nella memoria topografica the nella memoria di oggetti, ma queste non sono risultate correlate con test tradizionali di memoria visuo-spaziale. Nonostante i pazienti con SM dimostrino deficit della memoria visuo-spaziale, l'esplorazione attiva migliora la capacitd di acquisire una rappresentazione topografica di uno spazio complesso, come avviene nei soggetti sani, mentre la semplice osservazione non pare con ferire il vantaggio atteso nel ricordo dei contenuti degli ambienti. La rappresentazione virtuale di ambienti e pertanto utile per effettuare valutazioni della memoria spaziale the concernono aspetti topografici non valutabili con i test tradizionali.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thornton AE, Raz N (1997) Memory impairment in multiple sclerosis: A quantitative review. Neuropsychology 11(3):357–366

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beatty WW (1998) Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: Natural history and impact on productive living. Ital J Neurol Sci 19[Suppl.]:S381-S387

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beatty WW, Goodkin DE, Monson N et al (1988) Anterograde and retrograde amnesia in patients with chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 45:611–619

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rao SM, Leo GJ, Bemardin LB et al (1991) Cognitive dysfunction in MS. 1. Frequency, patterns and predictors. Neurology 41:685–691

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ryan L, Clark CM, Klonoff H, Li D (1996) Pattern of cognitive impairment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and their relationship to neuropathology on magnetic resonance images. Neuropsychology 10(2):176–193

    Google Scholar 

  6. Foong J, Rozewicz L, Quaghebeur G et al (1997) Executive function in multiple sclerosis, the role of frontal lobe pathology. Brain 120:15–26

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kirasic KC (1991) Spatial cognition and behavior in young and elderly adults: Implications for learning new environments. Psychol Aging 6(1):10–18

    Google Scholar 

  8. Maunsell JHR, Ferrera VP (1996) Attentional mechanisms in visual cortex. In: Gazzaniga MS (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT, London, pp 451–461

    Google Scholar 

  9. Van Essen DC, DeYoe EA (1996) Concurrent processing in the primate visual cortex. In: Gazzaniga MS (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT, London, pp 383–400

    Google Scholar 

  10. Morris RG, Pickering A, Abrahams S et al (1996) Space and the hippocampal formation in humans. Brain Res Bull 40:487–490

    Google Scholar 

  11. Abrahams S, Pickering A, Polkey CE et al (1997) Spatial memory deficits in patients with unilateral damage to the right hippocampal formation. Neuropsychologia 35(1):11–24

    Google Scholar 

  12. Epstein R, Kanwisher N (1998) A cortical representation of the local visual environment. Nature 392:598–601

    Google Scholar 

  13. Glenberg AM (1997) What memory is for. Behav Brain Sci 20:1–55

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rao SM (1997) Neuropsychological aspects of multiple sclerosis. In: Raine CS, McFarland HF, Tourtellotte WW (eds) Multiple sclerosis: Clinical and pathogenetic basis. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 357–363

    Google Scholar 

  15. Richardson JTE (1996) Memory impairment in multiple sclerosis: Reports of patients and relatives. Brit J Clin Psychol 35:205–219

    Google Scholar 

  16. Baddeley A, Sunderland A, Harris J (1982) How well do laboratory-based psychological tests predict patients' performance outside the laboratory? In: Corkin S et al (eds) Alzheimer's disease: A report of progress in research. Raven, New York, pp 141–148

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pugnetti L, Mendozzi L, Motta A et al (1995) Evaluation and retraining of adults' cognitive impairments: Which role for virtual reality technology? Comp Biol Med 25:213–228

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rose FD, Attree EA, Johnson DA (1996) Virtual reality: An assistive technology in neurological rehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol 9:461–467

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rizzo AA, Buckwalter JG, Neumann U (1997) Virtual reality and cognitive rehabilitation: A brief review of the future. J Head Trauma Rehabil 12:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brooks BM, Attree EA, Rose FD et al (1998) The specificity of memory enhancement during interaction with a virtual environment. Memory (in press)

  21. Grafman J, Rao S, Bernardin L et al (1991) Automatic memory processes in patients with multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 48:1072–1075

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mendozzi L, Pugnetti L, Saccani M et al (1993) Frontal lobe dysfunction in multiple sclerosis as assessed by means of Lurian tasks: Effect of age at onset. J Neurol Sci 115[Suppl]: S42-S50

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kujala P, Portin R, Revonsuo A et al (1994) Automatic and controlled information processing in multiple sclerosis. Brain 117:1115–1126

    Google Scholar 

  24. Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L et al (1983) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis-guidlines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 13:227–231

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kurtzke JF (1983) Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: An expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 33:1444–1452

    Google Scholar 

  26. Attree EA, Brooks BM, Rose FD et al (1996) Memory processes and virtual environments: I can't remember what was there, but I can remember how I got there. Implications for people with disabilities. In: Sharkey PM (ed) Proceedings of the 1 st European Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies. 8–10 July, Maidenhead (UK), pp 117–121

  27. Osterrieth PA (1944) Le test de copie d'une figure complexe. Arch Psychol 30:206–356

    Google Scholar 

  28. Schweigert WA (1994) Research methods and statistics for psychology. Brooks Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, p 236

    Google Scholar 

  29. Peruch P, Vercher J, Gauthier GM (1995) Acquisition of spatial knowledge through visual exploration of simulated environments. Ecol Psychol 7(1):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  30. Evans GW (1980) Environmental cognition. Psychol Bull 88:259–287

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pugnetti L, Mendozzi L, Attree EA et al (1998) Probing memory and executive functions with virtual reality. Past and present studies. Cyberpsychol Behav 1(2):145–155

    Google Scholar 

  32. Plohmann AM, Kappos L, Ammann W et al (1998) Computer assisted retraining of attentional impairments in patients with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 64:455–462

    Google Scholar 

  33. Golledge RG (1987) Environmental cognition. In: Stokols D, Altman I (eds) Handbook of environmental psychology, vol. 1. Wiley, New York, pp 131–174

    Google Scholar 

  34. Dominey PF, Boussaoud D (1997) Encoding behavioral context in recurrent networks of the frontostriatal system: A simulation study. Cog Brain Res 6:53–65

    Google Scholar 

  35. Steuer J (1992) Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. J Communication 42(2):73–93

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pausch R, Proffitt D, Williams G (1997) Quantifying immersion in virtual reality. In: Computer graphics proceedings, annual conference series. ACM SIGGRAPH, 3–8 August, Los Angeles, pp 13–18

  37. Singer MJ, Allen RC, McDonald DP et al (1997) Terrain appreciation in virtual environments: Spatial knowledge acquisition (Technical Report 1056). U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Science, Alexandria

    Google Scholar 

  38. Witmer BG, Singer MJ (1998) Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence 7(3):225–240

    Google Scholar 

  39. Stanney K, Salvendy G, Deisinger J et al (1998) Aftereffects and sense of presence in virtual environments: Formulation of a research and development agenda. Report sponsored by the Life Sciences Division at NASA Headquarters. Int J Hum Comp Interact 10(2):135–187

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Scientific Institute „S. Maria Nascente” “Don Gnocchi” Foundation, Via Capecelatro 66, I-20148, Milano, Italy

    L. Pugnetti, L. Mendozzi, E. Barbieri & D. Alpini

  2. Department of Psychology, University of East London, London, UK

    B.M. Brooks, E.A. Attree & D.F. Rose

  3. Psychiatric Unit Casa di Cura Policlinico di Monza, Monza, Italy

    A. Motta

Authors
  1. L. Pugnetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Mendozzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B.M. Brooks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E.A. Attree
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. Barbieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. Alpini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. Motta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. D.F. Rose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pugnetti, L., Mendozzi, L., Brooks, B. et al. Active versus passive exploration of virtual environments modulates spatial memory in MS patients: a yoked control study. Ital J Neuro Sci 19 (Suppl 6), S424–S430 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00539600

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00539600

Key words

Search

Navigation