Department of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, Casa di Cura del Policlinico.
Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca.
Neuropsychology. 2021 Mar;35(3):310-322. doi: 10.1037/neu0000730.
Right brain-damaged patients may show omissions and/or additional marks in target cancellation. The latter is classified as perseverative behavior and has been attributed to defective response inhibition or attentional disengagement deficit. This study aimed at (a) verifying that consecutive (immediate) and return (temporally distant) motor perseverations could be due to different mechanisms; (b) investigating the relationships among different types of perseveration (e.g., consecutive, return, scribble), spatial neglect and the impairment in specific components of executive functioning. Seventeen right brain-damaged patients underwent letter, star, bell, and apple cancellation tasks. A global index for each type of perseveration found and Mean Position of Hits, as a neglect index, were calculated. The following components of executive functioning were evaluated: motor programming (Frontal Assessment Battery [FAB] subtest), inhibitory control FAB, interference sensitivity (FAB and Stroop color-word interference test), set-shifting (Weigl sorting test, Phonemic/semantic alternate fluencies), and working memory (Backward Digit span). Ten patients out of 17 showed some degree of perseveration. Regularized linear regression analyses demonstrated that interference sensitivity and Stroop test performances were related to return perseverations and backward digit to scribble ones. No significant relationships were found for consecutive perseverations and between neglect and any type of perseverations. The present study showed that return perseverations might have a distinct etiology from consecutive ones, being related to an inability to update and shift between action programs according to the visual stimuli. A finer classification of perseverations could help in unveiling the neuropsychological mechanisms underlying each type of behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
右脑损伤患者在目标消去任务中可能会出现遗漏和/或额外标记。后者被归类为持续行为,被认为是由于反应抑制或注意力解除缺陷所致。本研究旨在:(a)验证连续(即时)和返回(时间上较远)运动性持续是否可能由不同的机制引起;(b)调查不同类型的持续(如连续、返回、涂鸦)、空间忽视以及执行功能特定成分损伤之间的关系。17 名右脑损伤患者接受了字母、星号、铃和苹果消去任务。计算了每种类型的持续存在的全局指数和命中的平均位置,作为忽视指数。评估了以下执行功能的组成部分:运动编程(额叶评估量表[FAB]子测试)、抑制控制 FAB、干扰敏感性(FAB 和 Stroop 颜色-单词干扰测试)、定势转换(Weigl 分类测试、语音/语义交替流畅性)和工作记忆(倒背数字广度)。17 名患者中有 10 名表现出一定程度的持续。正则化线性回归分析表明,干扰敏感性和 Stroop 测试表现与返回性持续与倒背数字到涂鸦性持续有关。没有发现连续性持续与忽视之间存在显著关系。本研究表明,返回性持续可能具有与连续性持续不同的病因,与根据视觉刺激更新和在动作程序之间转换的能力下降有关。对持续行为进行更精细的分类可能有助于揭示每种行为背后的神经心理学机制。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2021 APA,保留所有权利)。