Decision-making following closed-head injury: Can response speed be retrained?

Abstract

The present study was designed to assess the extent to which the effects of feed-back (FB) and time windows, on the RTs of closed-head-injured outpatients, might carry-over when these external cues were removed. RT and evoked potentials were recorded while 12 closed-head-injured outpatients and 12 matched controls performed an auditory discrimination task. The FB and time windows were provided on three trials, then gradually removed. Following the removal of the FB and windows, patient RTs remained significantly faster and were approximately equal to the RTs of controls prior to the presentation of the cues. As in controls, the RTs of patients following removal of the cues occurred at approximately the same time as their P300s (the latency of this event-related potential component is thought to index stimulus evaluation time). To this extent, patient RTs did not appear to be exaggerated beyond the time needed for stimulus evaluation. The results obtained, therefore, provided tentative evidence that the experimental manipulation might have a lasting effect on CHI patient RTs.

Older age, traumatic brain injury, and cognitive slowing: Some convergent and divergent findings.

“…Moreover, we do not know the influence of age on the effects of TBI on speed-accuracy relations. It has been suggested that patients with TBI may be biased toward accuracy (e.g., Deacon & Campbell, 1991a). If so, in older patients this bias may be enhanced.…”

“…The coefficient of determination, the slope of the regression line (s), and the intercept of the regression line (i) are shown in the lower right portion of each plot. result of damage to the frontal lobes (Segalowitz et al, 1992; for a related interpretation, see Deacon & Campbell, 1991a& Campbell, , 1991b.…”

Electrophysiological markers of cognitive deficits in traumatic brain injury: A review

“…There has been some success in retraining response speed in TBI patients. A study was designed (Deacon and Campbell, 1991) to measure the extent to which feedback and designated time windows for responding, might shorten the RTs of TBI patients and normalise responding. It was also asked whether these benefits would carryover when these external cues were removed.…”

“…Early investigations of the instructional influences on speed and accuracy have also shown that P300 latency does not vary as a function of the directed strategy employed by the subject (Kutas et al, 1977). Deacon and Campbell (1991) proposed that by emphasising speed over accuracy in training may have influenced the patients to abandon their default strategy of prioritising accuracy over speed which might be considered a compensatory strategy to the effects of brain injury. It may be that the cues during training served as a substitute for the inefficiencies of damaged frontal regions in monitoring ongoing performance and exerting control when a change in strategy to initiate increased speed of responding is called upon.…”

Event–related potential assessment of information processing after closed head injury

“…Several studies reported that visual P300 was delayed, although not reduced in amplitude, in survivors of a head injury Curry, Cummins, Eames, Rogers, & Chaudhry-Dijkerman, 1996;Heinze et al, 1992;Montirosso et al, 1997;Sangal & Sangal, 1996;Wright, Cremona-Meteyard, Geffen, & Geffen, 1994). In a series of studies, Campbell, Deacon, and coworkers found both longer latency and reduced amplitude P300s in visual and auditory oddball and feedback tasks (Campbell et al, 1986;Deacon & Campbell, 1991a, 1991bDeacon-Elliott & Campbell, 1987). Similar findings were reported by Unsal and Segalowitz (1995) and Olbrich et al (1986).…”