1I.R.C.C.S. San Raffaele-Turro,Milan,Italy.
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2018 Aug;24(7):703-714. doi: 10.1017/S1355617718000267. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
The aim of the present study was to investigate "Proactive-Adjustment hypothesis" (PA) during the Stop Signal Task (SST). The PA is implied in the highly inconsistent literature, and it deals with the role of response inhibition (RI) in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). This hypothesis assumed that participants would balance stopping and going by adjusting the response threshold (RT) in the go task. We verified whether the PA strategy was also implemented in our clinical group.
To reach this goal, we analyzed SST performances in a group of 36 patients with OCD and 36 healthy controls (HCs). To identify different participants' behaviors during the task, without preconceived notions regarding the diagnosis, we performed a cluster analysis. Furthermore, we analyzed the influence of drug therapy and we investigated whether the rule and reversal acquisition investigated with the Intra-Extra Dimensional Set Shift, differed in the two clusters.
We did not find any difference relative to the number of patients with OCD and HCs included in the two clusters. Furthermore, we found that only Not Proactive participants performed the task as fast as possible, while Proactive participants consistently slowed down their RTs and showed a lower number of Direction Errors, higher Stop Signal Delay, and worse cognitive flexibility.
Our results show that among patients with OCD the use of PA is changeable and does not differ from HCs. This finding supports the idea that the RI heterogeneity concerning patients with OCD could be related to PA. (JINS, 2018, 24, 703-714).
本研究旨在探讨停止信号任务(SST)中的“主动调节假说”(PA)。PA 在高度不一致的文献中被暗示,它涉及到反应抑制(RI)在强迫症(OCD)中的作用。该假说假设参与者将通过调整Go 任务中的反应阈值(RT)来平衡停止和继续。我们验证了 PA 策略是否也在我们的临床组中实施。
为了达到这个目标,我们分析了 36 名强迫症患者和 36 名健康对照组(HCs)的 SST 表现。为了在没有先入为主的诊断观念的情况下识别参与者在任务中的不同行为,我们进行了聚类分析。此外,我们分析了药物治疗的影响,并研究了 Intra-Extra 维度集转换中所调查的规则和反转获取是否在两个聚类中存在差异。
我们没有发现强迫症患者和 HCs 数量在两个聚类中的任何差异。此外,我们发现只有非主动参与者尽可能快地完成任务,而主动参与者则一直降低他们的 RT,并表现出较低的方向错误,较高的停止信号延迟,以及较差的认知灵活性。
我们的结果表明,在强迫症患者中,PA 的使用是可变的,与 HCs 没有区别。这一发现支持了这样一种观点,即强迫症患者的 RI 异质性可能与 PA 有关。(JINS,2018,24,703-714)。