A cognitive neuroscience-based computerized battery for efficient measurement of individual differences: Standardization and initial construct validation

Abstract

There is increased need for efficient computerized methods to collect reliable data on a range of cognitive domains that can be linked to specific brain systems. Such need arises in functional neuroimaging studies, where individual differences in cognitive performance are variables of interest or serve as confounds. In genetic studies of complex behavior, which require particularly large samples, such trait measures can serve as endophenotypes. Traditional neuropsychological tests, based on clinical pathological correlations, are protracted, require extensive training in administration and scoring, and leave lengthy paper trails (double-entry for analysis). We present a computerized battery that takes an average of 1 hour and provides measures of accuracy and speed on 9 neurocognitive domains. They are cognitive neuroscience-based in that have been linked experimentally to specific brain systems with functional neuroimaging studies. We describe the process of translating tasks used in functional neuroimaging to tests for assessing individual differences. Data are presented on each test with samples ranging from 139 (81 female) to 536 (311 female) of carefully screened healthy individuals ranging in age from 18 to 84. Item consistency was established with acceptable to high Cronbach alpha coefficients. Inter-item correlations were moderate to high within domain and low to nil across domains, indicating construct validity. Initial criterion validity was demonstrated by sensitivity to sex differences and the effects of age, education and parental education. These results encourage the use of this battery in studies needing an efficient assessment of major neurocognitive domains such as multisite genetic studies and clinical trials.

Computerized Finger Tapping Task in Adult Unipolar Depressed Patients and Healthy Subjects: Influence of Age, Gender, Education, and Hand Dominance

“…As in previous studies, men tapped faster than women (Arnold et al, 2005;Ashendorf, Vanderslice-Barr, & McCaffrey, 2009;Bornstein, 1985;Christianson & Leathem, 2004;Coleman et al, 1997;Elias, Robbins, Walter, & Schultz, 1993;Gur et al, 2010;Heaton, Miller, Taylor, & Grant, 2004;Hubel et al, 2013aHubel et al, , 2013bMitrushina, Boone, Razani, & D'Elia, 2005;Peters, 1980;Peters & Campagnaro, 1996;Ruff & Parker;Schmidt et al, 2000;Ylikoski et al, 1998), outperforming women by three to five taps (Ashendorf et al, 2009;Mitrushina et al, 2005). Heaton and colleagues (2004) reported that about 16% to 20% of the test scores were accounted for by gender.…”

“…Heaton and colleagues (2004) verified that education accounts for only about 2% to 4% of the variance in tapping scores. Still, as reported by other studies, best performances are often associated with more years of education, concerning not only higher levels of formal instruction (Ashendorf et al, 2009;Bornstein, 1985;Gur et al, 2010;Ruff & Parker, 1993), but also parental education (Gur et al, 2010).…”

“…Better performance is usually associated with younger age, as many studies have shown older subjects tend to have significantly slower tapping rates (Aoki & Fukuoka, 2010;Ashendorf et al, 2009;Bartzokis et al, 2010;Bornstein, 1985;Elias et al, 1993;Gur et al, 2010;Hubel et al, 2013aHubel et al, , 2013bRuff & Parker, 1993;Shimoyama et al, 1990;Turgeon, Wing, & Taylor, 2011;Ylikoski et al, 1998). To Bartzokis and colleagues (2010), age-related trajectory of finger tapping speed can be associated with brain myelin integrity, reaching its peak in mid-life and declining in older age, eventually leading to psychomotor slowing.…”

“…Therefore, recently, in an attempt to overcome such limitations, several computerized versions have emerged, which are able to measure the response time more precisely, requiring less time to administer, and generating instant scoring (Wilken et al, 2003). The FTT is now part of several recent batteries, such as the Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (Coleman, Moberg, Ragland, & Gur, 1997;Gur et al, 2010), the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics-ANAM 4tm Reeves, Winter, Bleiberg, & Kane, 2007;Wilken et al, 2003), the FePsy (Aldenkamp et al, 2002;Stewart et al, 2006), and the Neurotrax TM Mindstreams TM (Dwolatzky et al, , 2004Schweiger et al, 2003).…”

Lisdexamfetamine Effects on Executive Activation and Neurochemistry in Menopausal Women with Executive Function Difficulties

“…We did not, however, find an effect of LDX on working memory task performance. Although the task used in this study was validated in a large sample of healthy volunteers (Gur et al, 2010), education level has been shown to be correlated with performance on executive tasks, particularly the n-back (Gur et al, 2010).…”