Vanderploeg R D, Crowell T A, Curtiss G
Psychology Service (116B), James A. Haley VA Medical Center, 13000 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2001 Apr;23(2):185-95. doi: 10.1076/jcen.23.2.185.1210.
The present study examined the nature of verbal memory deficits in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) compared to healthy controls. The study was designed to control for methodological shortcomings of previous related research. Three groups of participants were used: (a) a head injured sample with moderate to severe traumatic brain injuries (N=55), (b) a control sample matched on age and initial performance on CVLT Trial 5 and Sum of Trials 1 to 5 (N=55), and (c) a control sample matched on age, education, and race, but not on initial CVLT learning performance (N=55). Current findings indicate that: (a) rate of learning was comparable across groups, consistent with no encoding differences, (b) TBI patients have a significantly more rapid rate of forgetting of new information than either acquisition-matched or demographic-matched controls, consistent with consolidation problems in TBI, (c) TBI patients have less proactive interference than demographic-matched control participants, consistent with a consolidation problem in the TBI group, (d) TBI patients and acquisition-matched controls have comparably low rates of proactive interference, consistent with impaired acquisition in both of these groups, and (e) TBI patients and controls do not differ in the benefit experienced from semantic or recognition retrieval cues, consistent with no differences in retrieval processes. These data support an impaired consolidation hypothesis, rather than encoding or retrieval deficits, as the primary deficit underlying memory impairment in TBI.
本研究调查了创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者与健康对照者相比言语记忆缺陷的本质。该研究旨在控制先前相关研究中的方法学缺陷。使用了三组参与者:(a)患有中度至重度创伤性脑损伤的头部受伤样本(N = 55),(b)在年龄以及加利福尼亚语言学习测验(CVLT)第5次试验和第1至5次试验总和的初始表现上匹配的对照样本(N = 55),以及(c)在年龄、教育程度和种族上匹配,但在CVLT初始学习表现上不匹配的对照样本(N = 55)。当前研究结果表明:(a)各组之间的学习速度相当,这与不存在编码差异一致;(b)TBI患者遗忘新信息的速度明显比获取匹配或人口统计学匹配的对照者更快,这与TBI中的巩固问题一致;(c)TBI患者的前摄干扰比人口统计学匹配的对照参与者少,这与TBI组中的巩固问题一致;(d)TBI患者和获取匹配的对照者的前摄干扰率相当低,这与这两组中的获取受损一致;(e)TBI患者和对照者在语义或识别检索线索所带来的益处方面没有差异,这与检索过程中不存在差异一致。这些数据支持巩固受损假说,而非编码或检索缺陷,作为TBI记忆障碍的主要潜在缺陷。