Different Food Hardness Affect Memory

Recent studies proved the role of mastication in learning and memory function. The effect of various food hardness on spatial memory in childhood is not fully understood. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of mastication activity in spatial memory in childhood by giving food with various...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wahyuning Ratih Irmalia, -, Jenny Sunariani, -, Christian Khoswanto, -
Format: Article PeerReviewed
Language:English
English
Indonesian
Indonesian
English
English
Published: Ectodermal Dysplasia Group 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/1/5.%20Different%20Food%20Hardness%20Affect%20Memory.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/2/5.%20turnitin.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/3/Different%20Food%20Hardeness%20Affect%20Memory.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/7/Peer%20Review%20%26%20validasi%201.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/8/Different%20Food.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/9/Different%20Food.pdf
https://repository.unair.ac.id/94717/
http://www.jidmr.com/journal/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Universitas Airlangga
Language: English
English
Indonesian
Indonesian
English
English
Description
Summary:Recent studies proved the role of mastication in learning and memory function. The effect of various food hardness on spatial memory in childhood is not fully understood. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of mastication activity in spatial memory in childhood by giving food with various hardness Post-weaned rats aged 28 days were divided into three groups. Control group was fed with normal pellets diet, blended grain and seeds (soft diet) for treatment I group and whole grain and seeds (hard diet) for treatment II group. Radial eight arm maze-test was used to assess spatial memory. Data collected was analyzed using One-way Anova. There was significant difference of spatial memory (p<0.05). Control group showed the best spatial memory, while treatment II showed the lowest performance.