Behavior at the Choice Point: Decision Making in Hidden Pathway Maze Learning

Abstract

Hidden pathway maze learning tasks (HPMLTs) have been used in neuropsychological research and practice for more than 80 years. These tasks require the use of visual and auditory task feedback signals to learn the order and direction of a pathway, typically within a grid of stepping-stones, or alleys. Hidden pathway maze learning tasks are purported to assess both visuospatial learning and executive processes. The original motivation for the HPMLT paradigm for humans was to reduce a complex tactual planning task to one in which decisions could be directly measured by discrete actions at choice points guided by visual cues. Hidden maze learning paradigms were used extensively throughout the 20th century, initially to study exploratory, anticipatory, and goal-related behavior within the context of memory research, and later as an experimental tool in neuropsychology. Computerization of HPMLTs have allowed for the measurement of different move categories according to the rule structure and ipso facto, clinically meaningful differences in memory and monitoring functions during spatial search and learning. Hidden pathway maze learning tests have been used to understand the cognitive effects of ageing, neurological disorders, and psychopharmacological challenges. We provide a review of historical antecedents relevant to contemporary applications of HPMLTs in neuropsychology. It is suggested that contemporary applications of HPMLTs could be advanced by analysis of component operations necessary for efficient performance that can inform theoretical interpretations of this class of tests in clinically meaningful terms.

Change in retinal structural anatomy during the preclinical stage of Alzheimer's disease

“…The GMLT (http://www.cogstate.com) is a computer‐administered hidden maze learning test, designed by one of the authors (P.J.S.) to measure spatial working memory and problem‐solving functions [71]. The GMLT has been described previously both in terms of performance within the context of studies with healthy elderly adults [51,72,73] and in MCI [74].…”

Do executive function and theory of mind predict pragmatic abilities following traumatic brain injury? An analysis of sincere, deceitful and ironic communicative acts

“…In addition, a deficit in terms of executive functioning is a common feature following TBI, as a consequence of impairment in the frontal areas of the brain. The term refers to goaldirected behaviours (Miyake et al 2000), including working memory, shifting and planning (Ashman, Gordon, Cantor & Hibbard, 2006;Dikmen et al, 2009;Smith & Jonides, 1999;Sullivan, Riccio & Castillo, 2009;Thomas, Snyder, Pietrzak & Maruff, 2014). The abovementioned abilities seem to have a significant role in the capacity to communicate efficiently, and they may be at least partially responsible for pragmatic impairment in TBI at different levels and to varying extents (McDonald & Pearce, 1998;Channon & Watts, 2003;Key-DeLyria & Altmann, 2016;Marini, Zettin & Galetto, 2014; for a meta-analysis see Rowley et al, 2017).…”

Communicative-pragmatic disorders in traumatic brain injury: The role of theory of mind and executive functions

“…To assess executive functions, we constructed three composite scores: (a) Planning, defined as the ability to plan a series of actions or thoughts in a sequential order in a goal directed fashion (Smith & Jonides, 1999;Sullivan, Riccio, & Castillo, 2009;Thomas, Snyder, Pietrzak, & Maruff, 2014). The planning ability composite score was obtained by averaging scores on the Tower of London task (ES; Shallice, 1982) and the Elithorn's Maze Test (ES; Elithorn, 1955).…”