Response latency and response accuracy as measures of memory

1984 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin M. MacLeod ◽  
Thomas O. Nelson
Author(s):  
Amanda S. Lee ◽  
Greg A. O’Beirne ◽  
Michael P. Robb

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: People who stutter (PWS) are able to anticipate a moment of stuttering. We wished to explore whether this anticipation might be reflected by either unusual word choice and/or delayed word production during a single-word confrontation naming task. METHOD: Nine PWS and nine age- and sex-matched fluent controls completed the single-word confrontation-naming task. Groups were compared on numbers of word-finding and fluency errors, response latency, and naming accuracy, measured against a novel ‘usuality’ criterion. Regression modelling of response accuracy and latency was conducted. RESULTS: The groups did not differ on naming task performance, except for a greater frequency of response latency errors in the PWS group. For both groups, responses containing word-finding or fluency errors were more likely to be non-usual names, and these were associated with longer latencies than accurate responses. For PWS, latency was positively related to participant age, and accuracy inversely related to stuttering severity. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insights into word substitution as a generalized behaviour, its function, and associated time-cost. Group-specific relationships imply greater sensitivity in PWS to changing demands and capacities, and highlight the complexity of interactions between physical stuttering behaviour and verbal avoidance.


1989 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Wyns ◽  
F. Coyette ◽  
R. Bruyer

Wyns and Bruyer in 1988 proposed a visual attention test that is easy to use and sensitive both to the age of the subjects and the level of uncertainty about the response required. This test was designed as a fine gauge of attention deficits in brain-damaged subjects with poorly structured complaints. We present here a preliminary application of the test to a group of 48 such persons. Analysis of response accuracy indicated that 27 subjects were deficient in this respect. Of the 21 remaining subjects whose reaction times were analyzable, only one-third appeared as entirely normal.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 4464-4482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane L. Kendall ◽  
Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽  
Wesley Allen ◽  
Janaki Torrence ◽  
Stephen E. Nadeau

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.


2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 141-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kira Bailey ◽  
Gregory Mlynarczyk ◽  
Robert West

Abstract. Working memory supports our ability to maintain goal-relevant information that guides cognition in the face of distraction or competing tasks. The N-back task has been widely used in cognitive neuroscience to examine the functional neuroanatomy of working memory. Fewer studies have capitalized on the temporal resolution of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to examine the time course of neural activity in the N-back task. The primary goal of the current study was to characterize slow wave activity observed in the response-to-stimulus interval in the N-back task that may be related to maintenance of information between trials in the task. In three experiments, we examined the effects of N-back load, interference, and response accuracy on the amplitude of the P3b following stimulus onset and slow wave activity elicited in the response-to-stimulus interval. Consistent with previous research, the amplitude of the P3b decreased as N-back load increased. Slow wave activity over the frontal and posterior regions of the scalp was sensitive to N-back load and was insensitive to interference or response accuracy. Together these findings lead to the suggestion that slow wave activity observed in the response-to-stimulus interval is related to the maintenance of information between trials in the 1-back task.


1967 ◽  
Vol 51 (4, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 316-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce O. Bergum ◽  
Donald J. Lehr

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document