Recall of emotional and neutral words and paragraphs in traumatic brain injury

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in verbal recall deficits and impaired processing of emotion encoded in facial appearance, prosody and the linguistic content of messages. Emotion facilitates memory (emotional memory advantage) for non-brain injured (NBI) individuals but the impact of emotion on verbal recall for linguistically encoded stimuli in TBI has not been explored.

Aims: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of stimulus emotional content on verbal recall of words and paragraphs in TBI compared to NBI individuals.

Methods and procedures: Six 10-item lists, each with five emotional and five neutral words, and six paragraphs (three emotional, three neutral) were counterbalanced and presented in random order to 20 individuals with TBI and 44 NBI. The number of words from lists and the number of content units from paragraphs were compared for the two groups.

Outcomes and results: The NBI participants recalled more words from the lists and content units from the paragraphs than the individuals with TBI. Both groups recalled significantly more emotional than neutral words. NBI but not TBI participants had significantly greater recall for information in paragraphs with emotional content.

Conclusions: Participants with TBI showed impaired recall of words and paragraph content. Emotion facilitated word and paragraph content recall for neurotypical individuals but emotional memory advantage was limited to words for the TBI participants.     

Correction to: Influence of oral anticoagulation on success rates and risk of bleeding events after iStent inject implantation combined with phacoemulsification

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology - The published online version contains mistake as the author's first name and last name have been interchanged as "Hild...     

Noise characterization of “effective quiet” areas on a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier

The purpose of this investigation was to characterize noise levels in spaces designated as “effective quiet” areas on a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier. Noise dosimetry samples were collected in 15 designated spaces, representing 15 noise measurements, while at-sea during airwing carrier qualifications. Equivalent sound level (L_eq) measurements were collected during flight operations (L_{eq (flt ops)}), non-flight operations (L_{eq (non-flt ops)}), and over 24-hr periods (L_{eq (24-hr)}). These data were compared to the 70 dBA American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH^®) Threshold Limit Value (TLV^®) for “effective quiet” areas intended for temporary threshold shift recovery when personnel live and work in a potentially noise hazardous environment for periods greater than 24?hr. The monitored areas were selected based on personnel occupancy/use during off-duty time periods. Areas were classified by either (1) leisure areas that included mess (eating areas), gyms, lounges, an internet cafe, and the fantail social area or (2) berthing (sleeping) areas. The L_eq measurements in decibels “A” weighted (dBA) were compared to determine significant differences between L_{eq (flt ops)}, L_{eq (non-flt ops)}, and L_{eq (24-hr)} and were compared between leisure area and berthing area. Measured noise levels according to time period ranged as follows: (1) L_{eq (24-hr)}: 70.8–105.4 dBA; (2) L_{eq (flt ops)}: 70–101.2 dBA; and (3) L_{eq (non-flt ops)}: 39.4–104.6 dBA. All area measurements over the 24-hr period and during flight operations and 46.7% of the areas during the non-flight operation time period exceeded the “effective quiet” 70 dBA ACGIH TLV. Mean L_eqs were 15 dBA higher during flight operations compared to non-flight operations in “effective quiet” areas (p?=?0.001). The L_eqs in leisure areas were significantly higher than berthing areas by approximately 21 dBA during non-flight operation periods (p?=?0.001). Results suggest noise levels in “effective quiet” areas frequented by aircraft carrier personnel during off-duty hours when at-sea may inhibit auditory recovery from occupational noise exposures that occur on-duty.