Talk:Memory improvement

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on April 2024.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Working memory#Neural maintenance|maintenance]] The anchor (#Neural maintenance) has been deleted by other users before.
[[Memory#Processes|memory processing]] The anchor (#Processes) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 October 2019 and 16 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brookewhitelaw.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 2 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Katie24569. Peer reviewers: Kelis Johnson, Czaharris.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 April 2020 and 20 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hthayerw.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for Improvement

Three improvements for this page:

1. Add information: The article doesn't include information suggesting that glucose levels can relate to improved memory.

2. Elaborate on new subject: Using the information from my citations I can add information about the research behind glucose improving memory.

3. Get more details: Everything can always be elaborated a little more. Since I am a neuroscience minor and am currently in a cognitive neuroscience class, I think it would be interesting to research the information stated in the cognitive neuroscience section and connect it to the evolutionary aspect.

@Wells.1105: Please feel free to make those changes / additions.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: Thank you, I will work on making these changes. User:Wells.1105

Suggestion to Add into Article

Glucose is a sugar that can easily be passed through the blood-brain barrier. Blood glucose levels can vary in people depending on many factors such as age, gender, and medical conditions. The normal level for a healthy human adult is about 70-110 mg/dl. Glucose levels can be increased by eating and by receiving insulin. While some fluctuation in glucose levels after daily activities are normal there are medical conditions that are caused specifically by glucose levels. Hypoglycemia for example, is a condition in which your glucose levels are abnormally low; this can be caused by glucose being released too slowly into the blood stream or by the body using up store glucose too fast. Glucose is the primary source of energy for the brain, yet the brain doesn’t make glucose; this means that all glucose must come from your diet. Glucose is used directly in the bloodstream and absorbed by the insulin made in the pancreas. It is also stored in our liver as a reserve for when we don’t have any readily available in our bloodstream. It has many uses in the body including source of energy and metabolism. It is also thought that glucose can affect memory. Research has shown that increasing glucose levels have shown to increase cognitive functions such as memory and learning (Gold. 1995). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wells.1105 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 November 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Additions to Memory Improvement 4/13/20

I edited the section about concept mapping, in order to elaborate on the ideas, improve the number of sources, and make the information clearer for the reader to understand. I also added a section about the drawing effect and how it can improve memory. Finally, I added a paragraph about a study that showed how learning a new skill can help improve the episodic memory of the elderly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katie24569 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Katie - I think you did an excellent job of targeting what can be specifically improved in this article as well as positive additions in terms of sources. The sections about the drawing effect and memory among the elderly are also well written. The only additional comment I might suggest is the idea to include other ideas about using memory tactics and training to improve memory as well as discussing the possibility or lack thereof of improving memory among amnesiacs. Good job! Czaharris (talk) 22:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Excellent revisions. I think providing studies that suggest the impact of the drawing effect and the improvement of memory in the elderly by learning new skills are important additions. An additional edit can be made to suggest other beliefs that are currently held about improving memory for the elderly, like crossword puzzles, or socializing that are less effective in improving memory, and what the results of the study suggest about these memory improvement tools. I agree with the previously made comment that there is a bit of a mixed idea about memory aids (like offloading) and ways for a person to become better at remembering. Overall, great job. Kelis Johnson (talk) 21:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really liked the edit about the memory clamps and how the physical can provide a retrieval cue. I also found the historical add on of Ariadne's thread to be an interesting connection. The only edit that might be an interesting add is how the idea of a "memory palace" or other mental constructions used as a retrieval cue might compare to the physical retrieval cues likes memory clamps.

Wilchuskycb (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review: Hi Katie, I thought all of your edits and contributions were written very well and provided information clearly and concisely. Including descriptions of the drawing effect was a good way to seamlessly link elements from class into this Wikipedia post. Also, your choice of sources to include was superb and provided more resources about the article for readers to investigate. Good job! Ccrabtree15 (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Ccrabtree15Ccrabtree15 (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of this article

This article seems to be about medical and psychological techniques that actually improve the performance of a person's memory. Keeping a better diet, reducing stress or training yourself to form links between ideas can all do this, and whether they do can be tested by systematic reviews of the appropriate controlled trials. Writing something down can also help you to remember things, but that seems to be a different topic - memory assistance rather than memory improvement. For that reason I think the new section on the Reality clamp doesn't belong here, but in another article. It's not the point of this article to list the ways people can remind themselves of something important if their unassisted memory is not up to the task because that's not memory improvement. @Rickyukon: I'm curious as to what you think of this reasoning. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reduce Section on Stress

The section on stress is helpful information, but in an article about improving memory, I don't think so much space needs to be dedicated to something that has harmful effects on our memories. Some information is good to include because it does have an impact, but links to further information rather than a detailed section would help to increase the focus of the article. Hthayerw (talk) 21:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

I changed the first sentence to say "enhancing" rather than "improving" so the definition does not include one of the words it's trying to define. I thought this could help to add clarity to defining memory improvement. Also, I changed a couple words so that the grammar would match (plural forms vs singular forms). I wanted to reach out to the community and make sure this is something that is actually an improvement. Hthayerw (talk) 15:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Hthayerw. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 09:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2023 and 15 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fannav99, Dhermatology (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dhermatology (talk) 19:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement to Personal Application & Intellectual Conception

Firstly, I might suggest rewriting the title to something like "Effective memory improving, learning, and study tips/strategies."

The strategies/tips I would like to add are: generation effect (and tie it in with testing effect), state-dependent learning, organizing, spacing effect, avoiding illusion of learning (fluency and familiarity effect).

Moreover, once I add these, I will specify which helps with encoding, retrieval, or both.

Fannav99 (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diet

Deletion of this section was justified because the sources are inadequate, do not meet WP:MEDRS, and the content synthesizes/speculates on interpretations, which is WP:SYNTH. There are no WP:MEDASSESS sources demonstrating that dietary factors positively improve memory. Zefr (talk) 21:47, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zefr I brought back the section - but removed almost half of the content, leaving Harvard Health of the Harvard Medical School and National Institutes of Health sources in this version. What is wrong with those sources?–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to remove the first two sentences in the section.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All the content is weak speculation. There are no WP:MEDRS sources. Please don't edit war - this section has no clinical guidelines or MEDRS reviews that would be needed as the quality of source to link diet and memory. Doesn't exist. Zefr (talk) 22:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These are the sources left in that version:

Publishing, Harvard Health. "Don't buy into brain health supplements". Harvard Health. Retrieved 2020-07-18.
"Office of Dietary Supplements - Vitamin B6". ods.od.nih.gov. Retrieved 2020-07-18.
Publishing, Harvard Health. "Boost your memory by eating right". Harvard Health. Retrieved 2020-07-18.
"Office of Dietary Supplements - Vitamin E". ods.od.nih.gov. Retrieved 2020-07-19.
Publishing, Harvard Health. "Boost your memory by eating right". Harvard Health. Retrieved 2020-07-19.
~~Dandekar, T. (February 1997). "Free radicals and memory loss". Redox Report. 3 (1): 71–73. doi:10.1080/13510002.1997.11747093. ISSN 1351-0002. PMID 27414774.~~

~~Jessie Szalay (27 May 2016). "What Are Free Radicals?". livescience.com. Retrieved 2020-07-19.~~
"Eating more fruits and vegetables may help men with memory loss". Harvard Health. Retrieved 2020-07-19.
Nehlig, Astrid (March 2013). "The neuroprotective effects of cocoa flavanol and its influence on cognitive performance". British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 75 (3): 716–727. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04378.x. ISSN 0306-5251. PMC 3575938. PMID 22775434.

I don't know about livescience or Redox Report and would be happy to remove those sources and their content.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources are reliable medical sources. In theory the text on the article that was removed made sense but there is a lack of studies on this topic in relation to diet currently. Right now they are conducting trials on nuts and brain function and memory [1]. The trials are only in the early stages. Like most diet topics we will know more in the future but right now there is a lack of data. It's not possible to have an entire section right on diet now per lack of sources. We need a good review published but that won't happen for a while. The best thing to do is wait. We shouldn't be citing livescience.com or Harvard Health on this. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That helps a lot, Psychologist Guy. Can we use the info from NIH re: Vitamin E and Vitamin B6?–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:50, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to the Vitamin E link on the NIH website there is no mention of memory [2]. I can't find any reviews on Vitamin E and memory apart from two Cochrane reviews that were looking at vitamin E supplements [3], [4] that found no effect. I have had a look at older trials and there appears to be no effect from taking vitamin e supplements for memory improvement ie. [5]. Vitamin E supplements are actually dangerous as there is suggestive evidence that they may increase cancer risk. The best way to get vitamin E in the diet is from food. I don't know of any studies that have looked at vitamin E and memory from dietary sources. In a nutshell there isn't enough data right now. I don't think we need to cite the NIH website. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Gotcha, Psychologist Guy Thanks for replying, you were very helpful. And, now, maybe I will stop taking a Vitamin E supplement.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Zefr I see from WP:MEDRS that the NIH is a reliable source here:

Statements and information from reputable major medical and scientific bodies may be valuable encyclopedic sources. These bodies include the U.S. National Academies (including the National Academy of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences), the British National Health Service, the U.S. National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization.

Then, the chart in WP:MEDORG and Core journals, as well as WP:MEDSEARCH, look like good places to go. Is that right?

My goal is not to edit war, my goal is to use helpful content from reliable sources... and right now, we just need to sort that out.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

add WP:MEDSEARCH–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NIH and the Office of Dietary Supplements are respected sources, if the content was applicable. The section on vitamin B6 and cognitive function cites this 1996 preliminary report, which is both out of date and unconfirmed by a MEDRS review, while stating overall there is no adequate evidence to link diet and cognitive function (including memory). Zefr (talk) 22:57, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Zefr, that's helpful! Thanks so much!–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:08, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The NIH source Zefr linked to at the bottom of the page it says "Updated: June 16, 2023" so this has been recently updated. They are aware of any updated research, unfortunately like with vitamin E there are a lack of studies in this area. In theory there is mechanistic data suggesting α-Linolenic acid may improve memory improvement but there is no human trial data currently. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks again! I appreciate your thoroughness and focus on ensuring I have clarity. A good combination!–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:01, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]