Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-sd5qd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-05T22:17:16.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The frequency and framing of cognitive lapses in healthy adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2021

Laura McWhirter*
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
Lachlan King
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
Eilidh McClure
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
Craig Ritchie
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
Jon Stone
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
Alan Carson
Affiliation:
Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
*
*Author for correspondence: Laura McWhirter, Email: laura.mcwhirter@ed.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

Many people present to health services with concern about cognitive symptoms. In a significant proportion those symptoms are not the result of pathologically defined brain disease. In some they are part of a functional cognitive disorder (FCD). We assessed the frequency of cognitive lapses in a non-clinical sample in order to consider the utility of frequency of cognitive lapses in diagnosing cognitive disorders.

Methods

Healthy adults, who had never sought help for cognitive symptoms, completed a questionnaire, distributed via social media, about self-evaluation of cognitive function, frequency of cognitive lapses, and use of memory aids, including Schmitdke and Metternich’s functional memory disorder (FMD) inventory.

Results

One hundred and twenty-four adults, aged 18–59 (median 23), most with further or higher education, responded. Thirty-one (25%) reported “fair” or “poor” memory. Forty-eight (39%) reported memory worse than 5 years ago, and 30 (24%) reported memory worse than others the same age. Participants endorsed a mean 13/18 specific cognitive lapses at least monthly. One hundred and eleven (89%) scored ≥4, the suggested cutoff for the FMD inventory.

Conclusions

Cognitive lapses described in FCDs are common in highly educated adults. The high frequency of lapses in this healthy population suggests self-reported frequency of lapses alone cannot discriminate FCDs from “normal” experiences. Further research is required to clarify the role of abnormal metacognition in FCD. Better understanding of the factors moderating subjective interpretation of cognitive failures will also aid development of better clinical risk-stratification methods in people concerned about future dementia.

Information

Type
Original Research
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Self-evaluation of memory function in 124 healthy volunteers, median age 23.

Figure 1

Table 1. Self-Evaluation of Memory.

Figure 2

Table 2. (N = 124) Frequency of Cognitive Lapse/Symptom in 124 Healthy Volunteers, Median Age 23.

Figure 3

Figure 2. Number of memory lapses/17 endorsed in 124 healthy adults, median age 23.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Memory aids and strategies.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Scores of 124 healthy adults (median age 23) on the Schmidtke and Metternich FMD short inventory.

Supplementary material: File

McWhirter et al. supplementary material

McWhirter et al. supplementary material 1
Download McWhirter et al. supplementary material(File)
File 21.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

McWhirter et al. supplementary material

McWhirter et al. supplementary material 2

Download McWhirter et al. supplementary material(File)
File 17.9 KB