Objective We examined perceived workload as it is related to Brief Visual Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) short-delay and long-delay performance in traumatic brain injury (TBI) and healthy comparison (HC) participants. Method The sample consisted of 39 TBI participants and 54 HC participants. Demographically corrected BVMT-R scores were used to evaluate short-delay and long-delay performances. The perceived workload was measured using the NASA-TLX. Results ANOVA revealed that the HC group outperformed the TBI group on the BVMT-R short-delay and long-delay score, p < 05, η p 2 = 0.05. ANCOVAs controlling for age were used to evaluate NASA-TLX group differences. In regards to the NASA-TLX, TBI participants reported higher levels of physical demand, effort, frustration and overall subjective workload on the BVMT-R short-delay compared to HC participants, p < 05, η p 2 = 0.01–0.09. Furthermore, on the long-delay of the BVMT-R, the NASA-TLX revealed that the TBI group reported higher levels of temporal demand, effort, frustration and overall subjective workload compared to the HC group, p < 0.05, η p 2 = 0.05–0.14. Conclusions Results revealed that TBI participants demonstrated worse BVMT-R performances than HC participants. However, TBI survivors reported higher perceived workload demands compared to the HC group in both short-delay and long-delay of the BVMT-R. Our findings suggest that TBI impacts non-verbal memory performance in both BVMT-R short-delay and long-delay. Also, brain injury may be impacting TBI survivors’ awareness of their non-verbal memory performance. Further work is required to determine what drives the impaired perception of non-verbal memory performance among TBI survivors.
Objective Research shows traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors underperform compared to healthy comparison participants (HC) on verbal fluency tasks. Verbal fluency is typically comprised of two tasks: letter fluency and semantic fluency. During verbal fluency trials, participants often cluster responses and switch between clusters, which can serve as measures of executive control and organization. Also, research shows that Anglo-Americans (AA) outperformed ethnic minorities on various aspects of cognitive functioning. We examined the relationship between TBI and ethnic diversity on letter fluency, semantic fluency, switching, and clustering. Method The sample included 45 HC adults (21 Hispanics; 24 AA), 33 acute TBI adults (ATBI; 11 Hispanics; 22 AA), and 26 chronic TBI adults (CTBI; 9 Hispanics; 17 AA). Results The groups were well matched, with the exception of gender. ANCOVAs, controlling for gender, revealed HC outperformed ATBI participants on letter fluency, p = .007, ηp2 = .10, letter switching, p = .006, ηp2 = .10, and semantic switching, p = .018, ηp2 = .08. We also found HC outperformed both TBI groups in sematic fluency performances, p = .000, ηp2 = .15. Next, we found Hispanics outperformed AA on letter clustering, p = .003, ηp2 = .09 and semantic clustering, p = .010, ηp2 = .07. Finally, an interaction emerged in letter clustering, p = .044, ηp2 = .06, with the Hispanic ATBI outperforming the AA ATBI group. Conclusion The HC group outperformed both TBI groups only on semantic fluency, but they outperformed the ATBI survivors on letter fluency, letter switching, and semantic switching. Hispanics outperformed AA on letter clustering and semantic clustering, suggesting the use of clustering over switching strategies to provide verbal fluency responses in this group.
Objective We evaluated perceived workload (measured by the NASA Task Load Index; NASA-TLX) as related to Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) performances in monolingual and bilingual traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors and healthy comparison participants (HC). Method The sample consisted of 28 TBI survivors (12 monolinguals & 16 bilinguals) and 50 HC (20 monolinguals & 30 bilinguals). SDMT written (SDMT-W) and SDMT oral (SDMT-O) were used to evaluate group differences. Results ANCOVA, controlling for age, revealed that the HC group outperformed the TBI group on SDMT-W, p = .001, and SDMT-O, p = .047. Furthermore, bilinguals outperformed monolinguals on SDMT-W, p = .017. On the NASA-TLX, an interaction emerged on temporal demand rating, p = .023, with TBI bilinguals reporting higher temporal demand on SDMT tasks compared to TBI monolinguals, while the HC monolingual participants reported higher temporal demands ratings compared to HC bilingual participants. Furthermore, monolingual participants showed higher levels of frustration with regard to the SDMT task compared to bilingual participants, p = .029. Conclusion Our data revealed TBI survivors underperformed on both SDMT trials compared to the HC participants. Also, bilingual participants demonstrated better SDMT-W performances compared to monolingual participants. Furthermore, our TBI bilingual sample reported themselves to be more rushed to complete the SDMT compared to monolingual TBI sample, but they were less frustrated. Meanwhile, our HC monolingual sample felt more rushed to complete the SDMT tasks compared to HC bilingual participants, but they were less frustrated. While we observed differences in workload ratings between language groups, it is unclear if language use, and/or other variables are driving these results.
Objective McCaul et al. (2018) recently revised the Dot Counting Test (DCT) cut-off score from ≥17 to 13.80; we evaluated the new cut-off in monolingual and bilingual traumatic brain injury survivors (TBIS) and healthy comparison participants (HCP). Method The sample consisted of 43 acute TBI [ATBI; 23 English monolinguals (EM); 11 English first language bilinguals (EFLB); and 9 English second language bilinguals (ESLB)]; 30 chronic TBI (CTBI; 13 EM; 9 EFLB; 8 ESLB), and 56 HCP (23 EM; 11 EFLB; 22 ESLB). Results An ANCOVA, controlling for age and education, revealed an interaction where ATBI-EFLB had higher E-scores than the other groups and the CTBI-EFLB had lower E-scores than the other groups. Both the conventional and proposed new cut-off (PNC) scores had different failure rates in ATBI (conventional cut-off: 9%; PNC: 28%), CTBI (conventional cut-off: 10%; PNC: 20%), and HCP (conventional cut-off: 11%; PNC: 13%). For language groups, EM (conventional cut-off: 14%; PNC: 22%), EFLB (conventional cut-off: 10%; PNC: 26%), and ESLB (conventional cut-off: 5%; PNC: 10%) demonstrated different failure rates across cut-off scores. Group differences were found with McCaul et al. (2018) cut-off, but not the conventional cut-off score. Also, chi-squared analysis revealed ATBI EFLB and EM had greater failure rates than ATBI ESLB. Conclusion Unfortunately, the new DCT cut-off score resulted in greater failure rates in TBIS. Furthermore, ATBI EM and EFLB were impacted more by the new cut offs than ATBI ESLB who learned English later in life, although the reason for this finding is unclear and requires additional study.
Objective We evaluated symptoms of anxiety (via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; HADS, HADS-A) on Stroop Color Word Test (SCWT) performances in traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors, as compared to healthy comparison participants (HC). Method The sample consisted of 40 acute TBI survivors [ATBI; 30 normal symptoms of anxiety (NSA); 10 abnormal symptoms of anxiety (ASA)], 30 chronic TBI survivors (CTBI; 16 NSA; 14 ASA), and 50 HC’s (28 NSA; 22 ASA). All participants passed performance validity testing. The SCWT included the word (SCWT-W), color (SCWT-C), and color-word (SCWT-CW) conditions. A series of ANOVAs were used to evaluate SCWT performances. Results ANOVA revealed a main effect group on the SCWT-C, p = .011, and SCWT-CW, p = .018, with HC’s outperforming the ATBI group. Furthermore, HC outperformed both TBI groups on the SCWT-W, p = .004. We also found that the ASA outperformed the NSA group on the SCWT-W, p = .036. No interactions emerged between group and anxiety. Conclusion The HC group outperformed both TBI groups on the SCWT-W, but only the ATBI group on SCWT-C and SCWT-CW. Furthermore, we found that there were only differences between the anxiety groups on the SCWT-W. Our findings highlight that anxiety impacts HC and TBI groups differently on the SCWT.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.