Hvidovre Hospital Psychiatric Center, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Percept Mot Skills. 2011 Apr;112(2):499-508. doi: 10.2466/22.27.PMS.112.2.499-508.
Color-form naming in A Quick Test of Cognitive Speed (AQT) is used to assess processing speed on three rapid automatic naming tasks, two of which measure single-dimension and the third of which measures dual-dimension naming speed. These tests have been used to identify changes in processing speed associated with normal aging. The present study evaluated whether a simple additive model could explain the normally expected relation between scores on measures of single- and dual-dimension naming speed. The AQT color (C), form (F), and color-form (CF) naming tests were administered individually to 270 adults (ages 18 to 70 yr.). Paired-sample t tests mean comparisons of C+F and CF naming times for the total group and for three age cohorts (ages 18 to 34, 35 to 54, and 55 to 70), each with 90 adults, indicated significant mean differences between these processing-speed measures for the total group and for the 18- to 34- and 35- to 54-year age cohorts. Thus, a simple additive model does not explain the relationship between single- and dual-dimension naming speed across ages. To provide a better description, an additive model with "overhead" (a measure of processing efficiency) was proposed and norm-referenced for using the AQT tests to assess normal and atypical ranges for dual-dimension processing efficiency (overhead). ANOVA with post hoc analysis (Scheffé) compared AQT C + F, CF, and overhead means across age cohorts. The results indicated significant mean differences for the CF and overhead measures, but not for the C+F measure. Normative ranges for typical overhead sizes were established for each age cohort. In clinical practice, an overhead larger than typical or normal for a given age would suggest executive dysfunction, involving attention, visual working memory, and set shifting.
在认知速度快速测试 (AQT) 中，颜色-形式命名用于评估三项快速自动命名任务的处理速度，其中两项测量单维，第三项测量双维命名速度。这些测试已用于识别与正常衰老相关的处理速度变化。本研究评估了简单的加法模型是否可以解释单维和双维命名速度测量得分之间的正常关系。AQT 的颜色 (C)、形式 (F) 和颜色-形式 (CF) 命名测试分别单独施测于 270 名成年人（年龄 18 至 70 岁）。对于总群体和三个年龄组（年龄 18 至 34 岁、35 至 54 岁和 55 至 70 岁，每组 90 名成年人），对 C+F 和 CF 命名时间进行了配对样本 t 检验均值比较，表明总群体和 18 至 34 岁和 35 至 54 岁年龄组的这些处理速度测量值之间存在显著的均值差异。因此，简单的加法模型并不能解释不同年龄段单维和双维命名速度之间的关系。为了提供更好的描述，提出了一个带有“开销”（一种处理效率的度量）的加法模型，并对使用 AQT 测试来评估双维处理效率（开销）的正常和异常范围进行了常模参照。使用事后分析（Scheffé）的方差分析比较了年龄组之间的 AQT C+F、CF 和开销均值。结果表明 CF 和开销测量值存在显著的均值差异，但 C+F 测量值没有。为每个年龄组建立了典型开销大小的常模范围。在临床实践中，对于给定年龄，大于典型或正常的开销大小表明存在执行功能障碍，涉及注意力、视觉工作记忆和定势转换。
