Promoting Active Inference of Healthy Older Adults With Language ActivityNCT07132281
A Language-Based Training Intervention to Enhance Cognitive Health in Community-Dwelling Older Adults
A study testing Language activities active inference, Language activities passive and Board Games in people with Promoting Active Inference of Healthy Older Adults With Language Activity, run by National Taiwan University Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
Trial summary
Taiwan is fast approaching a super-aged society, making it urgent to bolster cognitive health in otherwise healthy older adults. This integrated project tackles that need with a language-centered intervention grounded in predictive-coding and active-inference theory. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 60 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Promoting Active Inference of Healthy Older Adults With Language Activity
- What is being tested?
- Language activities active inference, Language activities passive and Board Games
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 120 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTaiwan
- Study dates
- 2 Sep 2025to 31 Dec 2028
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 60 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged between 20 and 30 (healthy young adults) or aged 65 and above (healthy older adults).
- Native Mandarin Chinese speakers who had no exposure to non-indigenous languages before the age of five.
- Have completed at least a junior high school level of education.
- Right-handed.
- Have normal or corrected-to-normal vision (e.g., through glasses or contact lenses).
- Able to fully participate in the entire assessment and intervention schedule (with no more than two missed intervention sessions).
- Achieve a score of 23 or higher on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).
Who cannot join
- Participation in another cognitive intervention program within the past two months.
- Cognitive intervention is not feasible due to dyslexia or physical illness. Meet the diagnostic criteria for Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or dementia.
- Presence of severe depression, or cognitive changes caused by other psychiatric, neurological disorders, or substance abuse, with symptoms that are unstable or interfere with functioning.
- History of brain injury or neurological conditions (e.g., stroke, aneurysm).
- Contraindications for MRI scanning, such as metal implants, pacemakers, or pregnancy.
- Claustrophobia (an anxiety disorder characterized by panic symptoms or fear of panic attacks in enclosed spaces such as elevators, vehicles, tunnels, or airplane cabins).
- Unable to undergo cognitive assessments due to visual or hearing impairments.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Chia-Lin Lee, Ph.D. contact
Taiwan1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
National Taiwan University
Taipei, 106319
Chia-Lin Lee, Ph.D., 886-921-364-008, chialinlee@ntu.edu.tw
About this study
Taiwan is fast approaching a super-aged society, making it urgent to bolster cognitive health in otherwise healthy older adults. This integrated project tackles that need with a language-centered intervention grounded in predictive-coding and active-inference theory. Over 12 weeks, community-dwelling adults aged 65 + join small-group reading-and-writing workshops that train them to actively predict, monitor, and revise linguistic information. Ninety volunteers are randomly allocated to an active language-prediction group, a passive reading group, or a hobby board-game control. Before and after the course, researchers collect behavioural tests, EEG, fMRI, and AI-based speech-language analytics to quantify gains and transfer effects across cognition, emotion, and daily function.
Read the detailed description
Taiwan will enter a super-aged society in 2025, with adults aged 65 and above expected to comprise 20 % of the population-a shift that makes preserving cognitive health an urgent public-health priority. To meet this challenge, our integrated project draws on predictive-coding and active-inference theory to couple language science with neuroscience, psychology, occupational therapy, and large-language-model analytics. Within this framework, the present sub-project tests a 12-week, small-group language-training curriculum that meets once a week for two hours. Sessions weave together reading aloud, listening, oral summarising, writing, and guided discussion, all structured to elicit continual prediction, self-monitoring, feedback, and creative revision during language use.
Approximately ninety community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older are being recruited and randomly assigned, in equal blocks of thirty, to one of three arms: an active language-prediction group that emphasises hypothesis-testing during language production and comprehension; a passive reading group that provides leisure reading and sharing without explicit predictive feedback; and a board-game control group that engages cognition but not language prediction.
Before and after the intervention, each participant completes a comprehensive battery. Behaviourally, the investigators assess verbal fluency, language memory, and real-time sentence-prediction accuracy, while electrophysiology (N400, anterior-positivity ERPs, anterior P2, and P300) and functional MRI capture neural plasticity associated with sentence processing, visual reasoning, and cognitive flexibility. Executive functions, divergent and convergent thinking, attention, affect, social cognition, and instrumental activities of daily living provide secondary endpoints to gauge transfer beyond language. Throughout the 12 weeks, spoken narratives are recorded and analyzed for idea density and syntactic complexity with large-language-model tools, yielding fine-grained markers of change unavailable to traditional testing.
The investigators anticipate that targeted, prediction-based training will rejuvenate age-diminished language-prediction signals, drive adaptive reorganization of executive and language networks, and produce broader cognitive and functional gains than either passive reading or non-linguistic gaming. Embedded in community settings, this program also seeks to foster lasting reading habits, strengthen collective cognitive resilience, and offer an ecologically valid blueprint for scaling evidence-based cognitive-health interventions.
- Being tested
- Language activities active inference, Language activities passive, Board Games
- Keywords
- active inference, language, cognitive enhancement training, neuroscience, large language model
- Medical subject headings
- Language
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Language activities active inferenceBehavioural
Participants will join reading or writing activities and come up with their own inference about wording or plots.
Language activities passiveBehavioural
Participants will join reading or writing activities and will be given step-by-step explanations about the wording and plots.
Board GamesBehavioural
Participants will play board games with each other.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active inference training | Experimental | Participants will undergo language activities and will be encouraged to actively infer based on the given language materials. Receives: Behavioral: Language activities active inference |
| Step-by-Step Guidance | Active comparator | Participants will undergo language activities and will receive step-by-step guidance. Receives: Behavioral: Language activities passive |
| Board Games | Placebo comparator | Participants will play boards games under a schedule matching the Experimental and Active Comparator arms. Receives: Behavioral: Board Games |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes of neural functional activity during inferential processing
Participants will undergo a Rule Inference fMRI task to infer underlying rules that map color configurations of circles in a triangular arrangement to a target color category within as few tries as possible under active or passive conditions. The goal for participants will be to infer the cue-category association rules using as few cues as possible. The primary outcome measure here is the degree of neural response estimate change in blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signal pre- and post-intervention.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of overall accuracy during inferential processing
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant overall accuracy in identifying latent rules in the Rule Inference fMRI task.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of learning rate during inferential processing
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant number of trials to criterion in the Rule Inference fMRI task.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of strategic performance during inferential processing
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant coefficients of expression of modeled response strategies in the Rule Inference fMRI task will be assessed.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of functional electrical brain responses during reading
Participants will undergo EEG language reading tasks in which participants were told to actively comprehend the sentence and to infer meanings for unknown pseudowords. The primary outcome measure here is the changes in N400 responses and anterior positive responses pre- and post-intervention.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score
Pre- to post-intervention changes in participant MoCA score. Score range from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Logical Memory I & II
Score range 0 - 75. Higher score indicates better verbal episodic memory.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Face Memory
Score range 0 - 48. Higher score indicates better visual face memory.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Verbal Paired Memory
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better verbal memory and learning.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Family Pictures I & II
Score range 0 - 64. Higher score indicates better visual memory and learning.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Word Lists I & II
Score range 0 - 36. Higher score indicates better verbal memory and learning. For II, recall score range is 0 to 8; recognition score range is 0 to 24.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Visual Reproduction I & II
Score range 0 - 104. Higher score indicates better visual memory. For II, recall score range is 0-104; recognition score range is 0-48.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Spatial Span
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better spatial memory.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Digit Span
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better auditory memory.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Vocabulary
Score range 0 - 66. Higher score indicates better vocabulary.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Digit Symbol
Score range 0 - 133. Higher score indicates better processing speed.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Block Design
Score range 0 - 68. Higher score indicates better visual processing.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Arithmetic
Score range 0 - 22. Higher score indicates better mathematical computation ability.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Matrix Reasoning
Score range 0 - 26. Higher score indicates better reasoning.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of overall accuracy for meaning inferences
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' overall accuracy in judging the semantic relation between newly learned pseudo-words and their semantic associates.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of electrical brain responses during the task switching experiment
Participants will undergo an EEG task-switching paradigm in which they are instructed to make an odd/even judgment or a size judgment on presented numbers.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of overall accuracy during the task-switching paradigm
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' switch cost, assessed through overall accuracy.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of Originality in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of Originality measures the uniqueness of the response in comparison to others. For instance, an answer that only 1% of participants come up with scores 2 points; an answer given by 5% scores 1 point.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes in Chinese Remote Association Task (CRAT)
The Chinese Remote Association Task is used to measure individuals' abilities in convergent thinking. The original developer of the Remote Associates Test (RAT) was Mednick (1962). The Chinese version of the Remote Associates Test was developed by Huang et al. (2012). In this test, participants are provided with three Chinese words (e.g., Taiwan, land, barrier), and they are required to find a fourth Chinese word that forms a meaningful association with all three given words (e.g., strait). The study consists 30 questions and includes two versions of the test, A and B, which have a correlation of 0.610. The internal consistency coefficients for these versions are 0.808 and 0.801, respectively （Ren et al., 2004).
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of completion time in Color Trails Test (CTT)
Performance is measured by recording the completion time.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of number of trials administered in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Participants' performance is evaluated by measuring total trials required to complete the task (fewer trials indicate better performance).
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of overall fluency of language production
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' fluency in language production.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of the number of errors in Color Trails Test (CTT)
The Color Trails Test (CTT) is a neuropsychological assessment designed to measure sustained attention, alternating attention, and executive functioning (D'Elia et al., 1996). The test typically takes between 3 and 8 minutes to complete and consists of two parts. In Part 1, participants are instructed to connect numbered circles (1 through 25) in ascending order as quickly as possible. In Part 2, participants must again connect the numbered circles in order but are required to alternate between pink and yellow circles, adding a set-shifting and divided attention component. Performance is measured by the number of errors for each part. This study employed the Chinese adaptation of the CTT developed by Guo (2009), which includes normative data for Chinese adults aged 50 to 88 years. The test-retest reliability coefficients for Part 1 and Part 2 were reported as 0.618 and 0.833, respectively.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of Fluency in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of Fluency measures the total number of responses.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of Flexibility in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of flexibility is as follow: Responses are categorized based on their characteristics, and the number of categories is counted as the score.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of overall reaction time during the task-switching paradigm
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' switch cost, assessed through overall reaction time.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of percent correct in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The proportion of trials with correct responses is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of percent errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The proportion of trials with incorrect responses is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of number of categories completed in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The number of sorting categories completed is measured (i.e., 10 consecutive correct responses per rule).
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of trials to complete first category in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The number of trials required to achieve the first sorting criterion is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of percent perseverative responses in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The percent perseverative responses that continued to follow the previous rule, regardless of correctness, is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of percent perseverative errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The proportion of incorrect responses due to perseveration (i.e., failure to shift after rule change) is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Changes of percent nonperseverative errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
The proportion of incorrect responses not attributable to perseveration is measured.
Measured: Week 0, Week 12
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Aug 2025
- Study start2 Sep 2025
- Primary completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Promoting Active Inference of Healthy Older Adults With Language ActivityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by National Taiwan University HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Taiwan University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07132281
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 202504009RIND
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 4 Aug 2025
- Last updated
- 7 Jan 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Data that can be shared include anonymized neuropsychological assessment scores, cognitive behavioral performance scores, neurophysiological data that have been published.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Jan 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Language-Based Training Intervention to Enhance Cognitive Health in Community-Dwelling Older Adults
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07132281
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 202504009RIND
- Keywords
- active inference, language, cognitive enhancement training, neuroscience, large language model
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- National Taiwan University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Taiwan is fast approaching a super-aged society, making it urgent to bolster cognitive health in otherwise healthy older adults. This integrated project tackles that need with a language-centered intervention grounded in predictive-coding and active-inference theory. Over 12 weeks, community-dwelling adults aged 65 + join small-group reading-and-writing workshops that train them to actively predict, monitor, and revise linguistic information. Ninety volunteers are randomly allocated to an active language-prediction group, a passive reading group, or a hobby board-game control. Before and after the course, researchers collect behavioural tests, EEG, fMRI, and AI-based speech-language analytics to quantify gains and transfer effects across cognition, emotion, and daily function.
Detailed description
Taiwan will enter a super-aged society in 2025, with adults aged 65 and above expected to comprise 20 % of the population-a shift that makes preserving cognitive health an urgent public-health priority. To meet this challenge, our integrated project draws on predictive-coding and active-inference theory to couple language science with neuroscience, psychology, occupational therapy, and large-language-model analytics. Within this framework, the present sub-project tests a 12-week, small-group language-training curriculum that meets once a week for two hours. Sessions weave together reading aloud, listening, oral summarising, writing, and guided discussion, all structured to elicit continual prediction, self-monitoring, feedback, and creative revision during language use.
Approximately ninety community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older are being recruited and randomly assigned, in equal blocks of thirty, to one of three arms: an active language-prediction group that emphasises hypothesis-testing during language production and comprehension; a passive reading group that provides leisure reading and sharing without explicit predictive feedback; and a board-game control group that engages cognition but not language prediction.
Before and after the intervention, each participant completes a comprehensive battery. Behaviourally, the investigators assess verbal fluency, language memory, and real-time sentence-prediction accuracy, while electrophysiology (N400, anterior-positivity ERPs, anterior P2, and P300) and functional MRI capture neural plasticity associated with sentence processing, visual reasoning, and cognitive flexibility. Executive functions, divergent and convergent thinking, attention, affect, social cognition, and instrumental activities of daily living provide secondary endpoints to gauge transfer beyond language. Throughout the 12 weeks, spoken narratives are recorded and analyzed for idea density and syntactic complexity with large-language-model tools, yielding fine-grained markers of change unavailable to traditional testing.
The investigators anticipate that targeted, prediction-based training will rejuvenate age-diminished language-prediction signals, drive adaptive reorganization of executive and language networks, and produce broader cognitive and functional gains than either passive reading or non-linguistic gaming. Embedded in community settings, this program also seeks to foster lasting reading habits, strengthen collective cognitive resilience, and offer an ecologically valid blueprint for scaling evidence-based cognitive-health interventions.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active inference training | Experimental | Behavioral: Language activities active inferenceParticipants will undergo language activities and will be encouraged to actively infer based on the given language materials. |
| Step-by-Step Guidance | Active comparator | Behavioral: Language activities passiveParticipants will undergo language activities and will receive step-by-step guidance. |
| Board Games | Placebo comparator | Behavioral: Board GamesParticipants will play boards games under a schedule matching the Experimental and Active Comparator arms. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 60 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Aged between 20 and 30 (healthy young adults) or aged 65 and above (healthy older adults).
- Native Mandarin Chinese speakers who had no exposure to non-indigenous languages before the age of five.
- Have completed at least a junior high school level of education.
- Right-handed.
- Have normal or corrected-to-normal vision (e.g., through glasses or contact lenses).
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Participation in another cognitive intervention program within the past two months.
- Cognitive intervention is not feasible due to dyslexia or physical illness. Meet the diagnostic criteria for Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or dementia.
- Presence of severe depression, or cognitive changes caused by other psychiatric, neurological disorders, or substance abuse, with symptoms that are unstable or interfere with functioning.
- History of brain injury or neurological conditions (e.g., stroke, aneurysm).
- Contraindications for MRI scanning, such as metal implants, pacemakers, or pregnancy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Language activities active inferenceParticipants will join reading or writing activities and come up with their own inference about wording or plots. | Behavioural | Active inference training |
| Language activities passiveParticipants will join reading or writing activities and will be given step-by-step explanations about the wording and plots. | Behavioural | Step-by-Step Guidance |
| Board GamesParticipants will play board games with each other. | Behavioural | Board Games |
Primary outcome
Changes of neural functional activity during inferential processing
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Participants will undergo a Rule Inference fMRI task to infer underlying rules that map color configurations of circles in a triangular arrangement to a target color category within as few tries as possible under active or passive conditions. The goal for participants will be to infer the cue-category association rules using as few cues as possible. The primary outcome measure here is the degree of neural response estimate change in blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signal pre- and post-intervention.
Changes of overall accuracy during inferential processing
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant overall accuracy in identifying latent rules in the Rule Inference fMRI task.
Changes of learning rate during inferential processing
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant number of trials to criterion in the Rule Inference fMRI task.
Changes of strategic performance during inferential processing
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participant coefficients of expression of modeled response strategies in the Rule Inference fMRI task will be assessed.
Changes of functional electrical brain responses during reading
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Participants will undergo EEG language reading tasks in which participants were told to actively comprehend the sentence and to infer meanings for unknown pseudowords. The primary outcome measure here is the changes in N400 responses and anterior positive responses pre- and post-intervention.
Changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Pre- to post-intervention changes in participant MoCA score. Score range from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Logical Memory I & II
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 75. Higher score indicates better verbal episodic memory.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Face Memory
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 48. Higher score indicates better visual face memory.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Verbal Paired Memory
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better verbal memory and learning.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Family Pictures I & II
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 64. Higher score indicates better visual memory and learning.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Word Lists I & II
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 36. Higher score indicates better verbal memory and learning. For II, recall score range is 0 to 8; recognition score range is 0 to 24.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Visual Reproduction I & II
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 104. Higher score indicates better visual memory. For II, recall score range is 0-104; recognition score range is 0-48.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Spatial Span
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better spatial memory.
Change in Wechsler Memory Scale III Digit Span
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 32. Higher score indicates better auditory memory.
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Vocabulary
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 66. Higher score indicates better vocabulary.
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Digit Symbol
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 133. Higher score indicates better processing speed.
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Block Design
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 68. Higher score indicates better visual processing.
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Arithmetic
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 22. Higher score indicates better mathematical computation ability.
Change in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III Matrix Reasoning
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Score range 0 - 26. Higher score indicates better reasoning.
Changes of overall accuracy for meaning inferences
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' overall accuracy in judging the semantic relation between newly learned pseudo-words and their semantic associates.
Changes of electrical brain responses during the task switching experiment
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Participants will undergo an EEG task-switching paradigm in which they are instructed to make an odd/even judgment or a size judgment on presented numbers.
Changes of overall accuracy during the task-switching paradigm
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' switch cost, assessed through overall accuracy.
Changes of Originality in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of Originality measures the uniqueness of the response in comparison to others. For instance, an answer that only 1% of participants come up with scores 2 points; an answer given by 5% scores 1 point.
Changes in Chinese Remote Association Task (CRAT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The Chinese Remote Association Task is used to measure individuals' abilities in convergent thinking. The original developer of the Remote Associates Test (RAT) was Mednick (1962). The Chinese version of the Remote Associates Test was developed by Huang et al. (2012). In this test, participants are provided with three Chinese words (e.g., Taiwan, land, barrier), and they are required to find a fourth Chinese word that forms a meaningful association with all three given words (e.g., strait). The study consists 30 questions and includes two versions of the test, A and B, which have a correlation of 0.610. The internal consistency coefficients for these versions are 0.808 and 0.801, respectively （Ren et al., 2004).
Changes of completion time in Color Trails Test (CTT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Performance is measured by recording the completion time.
Changes of number of trials administered in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Participants' performance is evaluated by measuring total trials required to complete the task (fewer trials indicate better performance).
Changes of overall fluency of language production
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' fluency in language production.
Changes of the number of errors in Color Trails Test (CTT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The Color Trails Test (CTT) is a neuropsychological assessment designed to measure sustained attention, alternating attention, and executive functioning (D'Elia et al., 1996). The test typically takes between 3 and 8 minutes to complete and consists of two parts. In Part 1, participants are instructed to connect numbered circles (1 through 25) in ascending order as quickly as possible. In Part 2, participants must again connect the numbered circles in order but are required to alternate between pink and yellow circles, adding a set-shifting and divided attention component. Performance is measured by the number of errors for each part. This study employed the Chinese adaptation of the CTT developed by Guo (2009), which includes normative data for Chinese adults aged 50 to 88 years. The test-retest reliability coefficients for Part 1 and Part 2 were reported as 0.618 and 0.833, respectively.
Changes of Fluency in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of Fluency measures the total number of responses.
Changes of Flexibility in Alternate Use Test (AUT)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Developed by Guilford et al. (1967), this tool serves as a quantitative measure for assessing creativity and divergent thinking. In under three minutes, participants are given common multipurpose items and are asked to creatively think of uses for these items on paper, such as various uses for a brick. The scoring of flexibility is as follow: Responses are categorized based on their characteristics, and the number of categories is counted as the score.
Changes of overall reaction time during the task-switching paradigm
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
Changes from pre- to post-intervention in participants' switch cost, assessed through overall reaction time.
Changes of percent correct in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The proportion of trials with correct responses is measured.
Changes of percent errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The proportion of trials with incorrect responses is measured.
Changes of number of categories completed in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The number of sorting categories completed is measured (i.e., 10 consecutive correct responses per rule).
Changes of trials to complete first category in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The number of trials required to achieve the first sorting criterion is measured.
Changes of percent perseverative responses in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The percent perseverative responses that continued to follow the previous rule, regardless of correctness, is measured.
Changes of percent perseverative errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The proportion of incorrect responses due to perseveration (i.e., failure to shift after rule change) is measured.
Changes of percent nonperseverative errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)
Time frame: Week 0, Week 12
The proportion of incorrect responses not attributable to perseveration is measured.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Jan 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Data that can be shared include anonymized neuropsychological assessment scores, cognitive behavioral performance scores, neurophysiological data that have been published.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Chia-Lin Lee, Ph.D. contact
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Language activities active inference, Language activities passive and Board Games in people with Promoting Active Inference of Healthy Older Adults With Language Activity, run by National Taiwan University Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Jan 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Taiwan. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Chia-Lin Lee, Ph.D. (886-921-364-008, Chialinlee@ntu.edu.tw), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes of neural functional activity during inferential processing (time frame: Week 0, Week 12). The study lists 38 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Jan 2026.