- Email: [email protected]
Effects of anxiety on Brief Test of Attention performance
Abstractsfrom the 17thAnnualMeeting
19
neuropsychologicalevaluationthat investigatedcognitivefunctioningin the domains of intellect,academicachievement,language,visual-perceptual,motor,memory,and attention/ executivefunctioning.We also thoroughlyassessedsocio-emotionalfunctioning.We submittedtwentymeasuresfrom acrossthe differentdomainsto an exploratoryfactor analysis based on inter-correlationswith othermeasures;redundancyof measureswas minimizedto reducetask-specificvariances.Resultsrevealedthatfive factors(wordretrieval,facilitywith visual/motorstimuli, global or verbal ability,processingspeed, and verbal memory) accountedfor approximately65% of the variance.Resultswill also be comparedwith confirmatorymodels. Clark,D. E., & King, M. B. E#ects of Readingand SpellingAbilityon the Kau~an BriefIntelligenceTest. Kaufmanand Kaufman(1990)havereportedcorrelationsbetweenthe KaufmanBriefIntelligenceTest(K-BIT)andtheWideRangeAchievementTest-Revised(WRAT-R)rangingfrom.27 to .44in a normalsampleand.42to .82in a sampleof highschooldropouts.Totestwhetherthe correlationscontinuedwiththerevisionof theWRAT-Rto theWRAT-111, a sampleof47 subjects was administeredthe K-BIT,WRAT-BI,and the PeabodyPictureVocabularyTest-Revised (PPVT-R).It wasexpectedthattherewereto be a highercorrelationof theWRAT-111 readingand spellingsubtestswiththe K-BITvocabularythanwiththe K-BITmatrices.It wasalsoexpected that the K-BITvocabularywouldcorrelatemorehighlywith the WRAT-111 than the PPVT-R becauseoneof theK-BITvocabularytestspresentsworddefinitionandwordoutlineswithsome lettersfilledin (muchas in the game show “Wheelof Fortune”).This lattertask mightbe differentiallyaffectedby readingand spellingskills.Thirty-fiveof the subjectsweremale, 12 werefemale.Agesrangedfrom8 to 32,withthe averageage 15.74.All subjectswereevaluated aspartof a clinicalassessment,mostforattentiondeficithyperactivity disorder,someforlearning disabilities,and somefor otherreasons.In thisgroupof subjects,20 wereclassifiedas ADHD, eightwereclassifiedas LD, twowerediagnosedwithbothADHDandLD,onewasTM, and 15 receivedno diagnosisfollowingtheirevaluations.TheK-BITvocabularycorrelatedsignificantly withWRAT-111 reading(r= .5796,p < .01),spelling(r= .4803,p < .01),and arithmetic(r = .4989,p < .01)subtests,respectively. Incontrast,no significantcorrelationswereobservedforthe K-BITmatricessubtestwith reading,spelling,or arithmetic(r= .3018,r = .0430,r = .3290, respectively).The PPVT-Rcorrelatedsi@lcantly with the WRAT-111 reading (r = .5716), spelling(r= .5945),andarithmetic(r= .5602)subtests,respectively. TheWRAT-111 continuesto correlatehighlywiththeK-BITvocabulmytest.Thesedatadidnotsupportthehypothesisthatthe vocabularyscores on the K-BIT rely more heavilyon readingand spellingskills than the vocabukuytask on the PPVT-R. Coy,W. B., Wynkoop,T. F., & O’Brien,W. H. Effectsof Anxietyon Brief TestofAttentionPe~ormance. Eighty-eightundergraduatestudentstookthe BriefTestof Attention(BTA;Schretlen,Bobholz, & Brandt,1996[TCN]),a 20-itemmeasureof dividedauditoryattention,undertwo conditions: Supportiveand anxietyprovoking.Assessment(or test) anxietyoftenprovidesa confounding contextin whichneuropsychological testperformanceis interpreted.However,the influenceof assessmentanxietyon neuropsychological test performanceis not well characterizedin the literature.The purposeof this studywas to examinethe effectsof assessmentanxietyon BTA performance.Subjectswerein goodhealth,freefrommedication,and avoidedcaffeinepriorto the study.Randomassignmentto conditionswas employed,andinstructionsfor the two conditionswerecarefullyscripted.Thegroupsdidnotdifferin termsofage,gender,racialcomposition, GPA,ACT scores,or heightand weight(relevantto the physiologicalmeasure;allps > .05). MultivariateAnalysisof Varianceexaminingheart rate changeover baseline,RevisedTest
20
Abstractsfrom the 17thAnnualMeeting
Anxie~ scores(pre and post self-report),CognitiveInterferenceQuestionnairescores (selfreport),andself-reportedlevelof anxiety(preandpostLikertratings)stronglysuggestedthatthe anxietymanipulationworked(N = 44 per group;p = .000;multivariateeffectsize = .50; all univariateFs[1,86]weresignificantatp = < .003).BTAscores,however,didnotdifferbetween thegroups(supportivecondition:M= 17.91,SD= 1.85;anxiouscondition:M= 17.64,SD= 1.94; p = .50).Theseresultssuggestthat performanceon the BTAis robustagainstthe effectsof experimentallymanipulatedanxiety.Futureresearchshouldexaminethe effectsof anxietyon BTAperformanceusingclinicallyanxiouspopulations. Crockett,D. J., Kaushansky,M., & Vernon-Wilkinson,R. DiscrepanciesinMentalFunctioningRelativeto WordKnowledgeon theSpeedand Capacity of Language-ProcessingTest. The purposeof this studywas to examinethe clinicalutilityof The Speed and Capacityof Language-processing Test(SCOLT;Baddeley,Emslie,& Smith,1992).Usingthe SCOLT,the rateof comprehension comparedto verbalknowledgeto providean indexofdiscrepancy.Cut-off points are providedto identifycases where the discrepancyis greaterthan expectedin the normalizationsample.We hypothesizedthat our clinicalsampleswouldshowa higherrate of discrepancythanfoundin thenormalizationsample.Wealsopredictedthatratesof comprehension abovethe levelof verbalknowledgewouldbe relativelyrare. We purposefullysoughta heterogeneoussampleof referralsfor neuropsychiatric and litigationassessmentsfor 176(Male = 53%)witha meanageof 40.3and 12.8yearsof educationalexposure.Medicatdataallowed 68%of theparticipantsto be classifiedas showingobjectiveevidenceof braindysfunction(BD: 26%).Usingthe 5th percentilerank,9% of ourparticipantswereclassifiedas havingabnormal discrepancies(Chi-Square= 187.74,p < .001).AlthoughtheoveraLldistributionof discrepancies for the BD andnon-BDgroupswasthe same(p > .08),only7% of the non-BDgroupshowed abnornd discrepanciesat the loth percentile,while25’%0 of the BD grouphad discrepanciesof thatmagnitude.Therewereno differencesin thepatternof discrepancies fortheneuropsychiatric andlitigantreferrals.Interestingly, 6490of oursampledemonstratedhigherthanexpectedlevels of comprehension. Certainlythisphenomenonis not rare and deservesfurtherstudy. Ckum, T. A., Bradley,J. D., Teichner,G., & Golden,C. J. Analysis of the General IntelligenceSubtest of the Luria-NebraskaNeuropsychological BatteryIII. The purposeof this studywas to evaluatethe concurrentvalidityof the GeneralIntelligence subtest(GI) of the Luria-NebraskaNeuropsychologicalBatteryIII (LNNB)to the Wechsler Adult IntelligenceScale-Revised(WAIS-R)by identifyingcorrelationsbetween the two factorscomprisingthe GI and the basicindicesfromthe WAIS-R(Verbal,Performance,and Full-Scale).A principalcomponentsfactoranalysiswitha varimaxrotationwasconductedon the GI for all subjects (N = 229). Results indicated two distinct factors: a Complex Visual-Verbalfactor (CVV)and an OverlearnedVerbalfactor (OV).Correlationswere then conductedon a subset of subjects(n = 54), who were referred for a neuropsychological evaluation,betweenthe GI and WAIS-Rsummaryscores.It was expectedthathighnegative correlationswould be observedbetweenthe two tests becauselower scoreson the LNNB indicatelessimpairment.CVVcorrelated– .612withVIQ, – .699withPIQ, and – .717with FSIQ while OV correlated –.618 with VIQ, –.491 with PIQ, and –.638 with FSIQ (all ps<.001). Theresultssupporttheconcurrentvalidityof theLNNBGeneralIntelligencescale as a measureof intellectualfunctioning.
19
neuropsychologicalevaluationthat investigatedcognitivefunctioningin the domains of intellect,academicachievement,language,visual-perceptual,motor,memory,and attention/ executivefunctioning.We also thoroughlyassessedsocio-emotionalfunctioning.We submittedtwentymeasuresfrom acrossthe differentdomainsto an exploratoryfactor analysis based on inter-correlationswith othermeasures;redundancyof measureswas minimizedto reducetask-specificvariances.Resultsrevealedthatfive factors(wordretrieval,facilitywith visual/motorstimuli, global or verbal ability,processingspeed, and verbal memory) accountedfor approximately65% of the variance.Resultswill also be comparedwith confirmatorymodels. Clark,D. E., & King, M. B. E#ects of Readingand SpellingAbilityon the Kau~an BriefIntelligenceTest. Kaufmanand Kaufman(1990)havereportedcorrelationsbetweenthe KaufmanBriefIntelligenceTest(K-BIT)andtheWideRangeAchievementTest-Revised(WRAT-R)rangingfrom.27 to .44in a normalsampleand.42to .82in a sampleof highschooldropouts.Totestwhetherthe correlationscontinuedwiththerevisionof theWRAT-Rto theWRAT-111, a sampleof47 subjects was administeredthe K-BIT,WRAT-BI,and the PeabodyPictureVocabularyTest-Revised (PPVT-R).It wasexpectedthattherewereto be a highercorrelationof theWRAT-111 readingand spellingsubtestswiththe K-BITvocabularythanwiththe K-BITmatrices.It wasalsoexpected that the K-BITvocabularywouldcorrelatemorehighlywith the WRAT-111 than the PPVT-R becauseoneof theK-BITvocabularytestspresentsworddefinitionandwordoutlineswithsome lettersfilledin (muchas in the game show “Wheelof Fortune”).This lattertask mightbe differentiallyaffectedby readingand spellingskills.Thirty-fiveof the subjectsweremale, 12 werefemale.Agesrangedfrom8 to 32,withthe averageage 15.74.All subjectswereevaluated aspartof a clinicalassessment,mostforattentiondeficithyperactivity disorder,someforlearning disabilities,and somefor otherreasons.In thisgroupof subjects,20 wereclassifiedas ADHD, eightwereclassifiedas LD, twowerediagnosedwithbothADHDandLD,onewasTM, and 15 receivedno diagnosisfollowingtheirevaluations.TheK-BITvocabularycorrelatedsignificantly withWRAT-111 reading(r= .5796,p < .01),spelling(r= .4803,p < .01),and arithmetic(r = .4989,p < .01)subtests,respectively. Incontrast,no significantcorrelationswereobservedforthe K-BITmatricessubtestwith reading,spelling,or arithmetic(r= .3018,r = .0430,r = .3290, respectively).The PPVT-Rcorrelatedsi@lcantly with the WRAT-111 reading (r = .5716), spelling(r= .5945),andarithmetic(r= .5602)subtests,respectively. TheWRAT-111 continuesto correlatehighlywiththeK-BITvocabulmytest.Thesedatadidnotsupportthehypothesisthatthe vocabularyscores on the K-BIT rely more heavilyon readingand spellingskills than the vocabukuytask on the PPVT-R. Coy,W. B., Wynkoop,T. F., & O’Brien,W. H. Effectsof Anxietyon Brief TestofAttentionPe~ormance. Eighty-eightundergraduatestudentstookthe BriefTestof Attention(BTA;Schretlen,Bobholz, & Brandt,1996[TCN]),a 20-itemmeasureof dividedauditoryattention,undertwo conditions: Supportiveand anxietyprovoking.Assessment(or test) anxietyoftenprovidesa confounding contextin whichneuropsychological testperformanceis interpreted.However,the influenceof assessmentanxietyon neuropsychological test performanceis not well characterizedin the literature.The purposeof this studywas to examinethe effectsof assessmentanxietyon BTA performance.Subjectswerein goodhealth,freefrommedication,and avoidedcaffeinepriorto the study.Randomassignmentto conditionswas employed,andinstructionsfor the two conditionswerecarefullyscripted.Thegroupsdidnotdifferin termsofage,gender,racialcomposition, GPA,ACT scores,or heightand weight(relevantto the physiologicalmeasure;allps > .05). MultivariateAnalysisof Varianceexaminingheart rate changeover baseline,RevisedTest
20
Abstractsfrom the 17thAnnualMeeting
Anxie~ scores(pre and post self-report),CognitiveInterferenceQuestionnairescores (selfreport),andself-reportedlevelof anxiety(preandpostLikertratings)stronglysuggestedthatthe anxietymanipulationworked(N = 44 per group;p = .000;multivariateeffectsize = .50; all univariateFs[1,86]weresignificantatp = < .003).BTAscores,however,didnotdifferbetween thegroups(supportivecondition:M= 17.91,SD= 1.85;anxiouscondition:M= 17.64,SD= 1.94; p = .50).Theseresultssuggestthat performanceon the BTAis robustagainstthe effectsof experimentallymanipulatedanxiety.Futureresearchshouldexaminethe effectsof anxietyon BTAperformanceusingclinicallyanxiouspopulations. Crockett,D. J., Kaushansky,M., & Vernon-Wilkinson,R. DiscrepanciesinMentalFunctioningRelativeto WordKnowledgeon theSpeedand Capacity of Language-ProcessingTest. The purposeof this studywas to examinethe clinicalutilityof The Speed and Capacityof Language-processing Test(SCOLT;Baddeley,Emslie,& Smith,1992).Usingthe SCOLT,the rateof comprehension comparedto verbalknowledgeto providean indexofdiscrepancy.Cut-off points are providedto identifycases where the discrepancyis greaterthan expectedin the normalizationsample.We hypothesizedthat our clinicalsampleswouldshowa higherrate of discrepancythanfoundin thenormalizationsample.Wealsopredictedthatratesof comprehension abovethe levelof verbalknowledgewouldbe relativelyrare. We purposefullysoughta heterogeneoussampleof referralsfor neuropsychiatric and litigationassessmentsfor 176(Male = 53%)witha meanageof 40.3and 12.8yearsof educationalexposure.Medicatdataallowed 68%of theparticipantsto be classifiedas showingobjectiveevidenceof braindysfunction(BD: 26%).Usingthe 5th percentilerank,9% of ourparticipantswereclassifiedas havingabnormal discrepancies(Chi-Square= 187.74,p < .001).AlthoughtheoveraLldistributionof discrepancies for the BD andnon-BDgroupswasthe same(p > .08),only7% of the non-BDgroupshowed abnornd discrepanciesat the loth percentile,while25’%0 of the BD grouphad discrepanciesof thatmagnitude.Therewereno differencesin thepatternof discrepancies fortheneuropsychiatric andlitigantreferrals.Interestingly, 6490of oursampledemonstratedhigherthanexpectedlevels of comprehension. Certainlythisphenomenonis not rare and deservesfurtherstudy. Ckum, T. A., Bradley,J. D., Teichner,G., & Golden,C. J. Analysis of the General IntelligenceSubtest of the Luria-NebraskaNeuropsychological BatteryIII. The purposeof this studywas to evaluatethe concurrentvalidityof the GeneralIntelligence subtest(GI) of the Luria-NebraskaNeuropsychologicalBatteryIII (LNNB)to the Wechsler Adult IntelligenceScale-Revised(WAIS-R)by identifyingcorrelationsbetween the two factorscomprisingthe GI and the basicindicesfromthe WAIS-R(Verbal,Performance,and Full-Scale).A principalcomponentsfactoranalysiswitha varimaxrotationwasconductedon the GI for all subjects (N = 229). Results indicated two distinct factors: a Complex Visual-Verbalfactor (CVV)and an OverlearnedVerbalfactor (OV).Correlationswere then conductedon a subset of subjects(n = 54), who were referred for a neuropsychological evaluation,betweenthe GI and WAIS-Rsummaryscores.It was expectedthathighnegative correlationswould be observedbetweenthe two tests becauselower scoreson the LNNB indicatelessimpairment.CVVcorrelated– .612withVIQ, – .699withPIQ, and – .717with FSIQ while OV correlated –.618 with VIQ, –.491 with PIQ, and –.638 with FSIQ (all ps<.001). Theresultssupporttheconcurrentvalidityof theLNNBGeneralIntelligencescale as a measureof intellectualfunctioning.