Effects of severe closed-head injury on three stages of information processing

Schmitter‐Edgecombe, Maureen; Marks, William; Fahy, John F.; Long, Charles J.

doi:10.1080/01688639208402858

Cited by 36 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, interference was high at the level of response sets, and this might explain the greater switch costs for the CHI group in this study. Consistent with this possibility, previous studies in the CHI literature have repeatedly demonstrated inefficiencies in the response selection stage of information processing following severe CHI (e.g., Schmitter-Edgecombe, Marks, Fahy, & Long, 1992;Shum, McFarland, Bain, & Humphreys, 1990;van Zomeren, 1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury.

Schmitter‐Edgecombe

Langill

2006

Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors used a predictable, externally cued task-switching paradigm to investigate executive control in a severe closed-head injury (CHI) population. Eighteen individuals with severe CHI and 18 controls switched between classifying whether a digit was odd or even and whether a letter was a consonant or vowel on every 4th trial. The target stimuli appeared in a circle divided into 8 equivalent parts. Presentation of the stimuli rotated clockwise. Participants performed the switching task at both a short (200 ms) and a long (1,000 ms) preparatory interval. Although the participants with CHI exhibited slower response times and greater switch costs, similar to controls, additional preparatory time reduced the switch costs, and the switch costs were limited to the 1st trial in the run. These findings indicate that participants with severe CHI were able to take advantage of time to prepare for the task switch, and the executive control processes involved in the switch costs were completed before the 1st trial of the run ended. Keywordsclosed-head injury; traumatic brain injury; executive functions; task switching; set shifting Multiple-task performance is theorized to involve executive control processes, which supervise the selection, initiation, execution, and termination of each task (e.g., Baddeley, 1986;Logan, 1985;Norman & Shallice, 1986;Rubinstein, Meyer, & Evans, 2001). In the closed-head injury (CHI) literature, much of the research that has addressed multiple-task performance has focused on simultaneous multitask performance rather than successive or rapid alternation multiple-task performance. These studies generally indicate that persons who suffer severe CHI (i.e., brain injury resulting from a rapid acceleration of the head followed by a rapid deceleration without an object penetrating the brain) experience greater difficulty than controls in coordinating and monitoring simultaneous task performances (e.g., Brouwer, Verzendaal, van der

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury.

Schmitter‐Edgecombe

Langill

2006

Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some previous studies have concluded that the response selection stage is slowed in CHI on the basis of larger effects of differences in S-R compatibility in CHI compared to controls (Shum et al, 1990;Schmitter-Edgecombe et al, 1992), although there are contradictory findings (Stokx and Gaillard, 1986). The lack of such differential effects here perhaps can be best attributed to a very weak overall compatibility effect: There were no main effects of S-R mapping for all the conditions or in the analyses of the simple effects for the Choice and SD conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Greater effects of S-R compatibility in CHI have been reported (Shum et al, 1990;Schmitter-Edgecombe, Marks, Fahey, & Long, 1992), even in one group without significantly elevated overall RT (Shum et al, 1990). However, Stokx and Gaillard (1986) had previously failed to find a differential effect of S-R compatibility in a brain injured group despite slower RT overall in patients than in controls.…”

Section: Experiments 3 Choice Rt and Sen-sory Dominancementioning

confidence: 94%

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Zahn¹,

Mirsky²

1999

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of deficits in attention in closed head injury (CHI) was studied by three reaction time (RT) paradigms given to 20 patients who had a CHI 2 or more years previously and to 25 controls. We studied the effects of temporal uncertainty by varying the length and regularity of the preparatory interval, the effects of stimulus modality uncertainty on simple RT to tones and lights, and the effects of response selection in choice RT. The CHI group showed slower and more variable RT than controls under all conditions. In addition, a long preparatory interval on the preceding trial retarded RT more in the CHI group, and they showed greater effects of stimulus modality uncertainty. Both of these findings suggest a difficulty in shifting attention to unexpected stimuli. These greater effects on RT of variations of attention or preparation in CHI may account for their greater within-subject variability possibly due to frontal lobe damage.

show abstract

“…From a cognitive point of view, there is still a lack of consensus as to which of the specific stages are impaired in TBI. Some authors have postulated a slowed stimulus identification, while others have proposed that the response selection is the principal stage that is impaired in this population [28,62,63].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional control and slowness of information processing after severe traumatic brain injury

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention is a basic cognitive function and a prerequisite for other cognitive processes and is frequently impaired after traumatic brain injury. In the present study, 29 severe traumatic brain injury patients and 30 control subjects completed a battery of three neuropsychological tests of attention (WCST, TMT, Stroop). The aim was to clarify the attentional mechanisms underlying tests performance and to explore the types of attentional impairment after severe traumatic brain injury. Significant differences were found between the control and clinical groups in almost all measures. However, some of these differences disappeared when the speed of information processing was controlled using covariance analysis. In addition, a factor analysis revealed a four-factor solution explaining 89.6% of the variance in the data, i.e. cognitive flexibility, speed of processing, interference and working memory. This result supports the view of at least four different subprocesses of attentional control underlie test performance and allows one to differentiate between high- and low-level processes. The implications for neuropsychological assessment and rehabilitation are discussed.

show abstract

Effects of severe closed-head injury on three stages of information processing

Cited by 36 publications

References 31 publications

Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury.

Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury.

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Attentional control and slowness of information processing after severe traumatic brain injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About