荷兰语版 "去/不去 "参数任务的收敛性和区分性试点研究。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1097/WNN.0000000000000363
Joan E van Horn, Anna van der Schoot, Julia Wilpert, Hessel J Engelbregt, Nico Brand
{"title":"荷兰语版 \"去/不去 \"参数任务的收敛性和区分性试点研究。","authors":"Joan E van Horn, Anna van der Schoot, Julia Wilpert, Hessel J Engelbregt, Nico Brand","doi":"10.1097/WNN.0000000000000363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The parametric go/no-go (PGNG) task is a computerized task that is designed to measure cognitive flexibility, response inhibition, and working memory. The PGNG task has been shown to measure core executive functions (EFs) in a psychometrically sound, brief, and ecologically valid manner.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the PGNG task in a convenience sample of nonclinical adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample consisted of 74 highly educated adults, with an average age of 36 years. Forty-two participants completed test battery A to investigate the task's convergent validity; 36 participants completed test battery B to investigate the task's discriminant validity. The results were analyzed using a repeated-measures ANOVA, Friedman's test, paired-samples t test, and correlation analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Level 3 of the PGNG task places increased demands on sustained attention, response inhibition, and set-shifting. Several moderate correlations between level 3 and a complex EFs measure supported the convergent validity of this level of the PGNG task. The convergent validity of levels 1 and 2 was not supported. No significant correlations were found between PGNG levels and non-EF tests, supporting discriminant validity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study included a rather homogenous sample of highly educated participants, which might explain the convergent validity of level 3 of the Dutch version of the PGNG task. Hence, to overcome these potentially confounding factors, the Dutch version of the PGNG task should be investigated in a larger and more heterogeneous population in terms of age and educational level.</p>","PeriodicalId":50671,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","volume":" ","pages":"62-72"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Pilot Study of the Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Dutch Version of the Parametric Go/No-Go Task.\",\"authors\":\"Joan E van Horn, Anna van der Schoot, Julia Wilpert, Hessel J Engelbregt, Nico Brand\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/WNN.0000000000000363\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The parametric go/no-go (PGNG) task is a computerized task that is designed to measure cognitive flexibility, response inhibition, and working memory. The PGNG task has been shown to measure core executive functions (EFs) in a psychometrically sound, brief, and ecologically valid manner.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the PGNG task in a convenience sample of nonclinical adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The sample consisted of 74 highly educated adults, with an average age of 36 years. Forty-two participants completed test battery A to investigate the task's convergent validity; 36 participants completed test battery B to investigate the task's discriminant validity. The results were analyzed using a repeated-measures ANOVA, Friedman's test, paired-samples t test, and correlation analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Level 3 of the PGNG task places increased demands on sustained attention, response inhibition, and set-shifting. Several moderate correlations between level 3 and a complex EFs measure supported the convergent validity of this level of the PGNG task. The convergent validity of levels 1 and 2 was not supported. No significant correlations were found between PGNG levels and non-EF tests, supporting discriminant validity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study included a rather homogenous sample of highly educated participants, which might explain the convergent validity of level 3 of the Dutch version of the PGNG task. Hence, to overcome these potentially confounding factors, the Dutch version of the PGNG task should be investigated in a larger and more heterogeneous population in terms of age and educational level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"62-72\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000363\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000363","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景介绍参数去/不去(PGNG)任务是一项计算机化任务,旨在测量认知灵活性、反应抑制和工作记忆。PGNG 任务已被证明能以心理计量学上可靠、简短和生态学上有效的方式测量核心执行功能(EFs):在非临床成年人样本中分析荷兰语版 PGNG 任务的心理测量特性:样本由 74 名受过高等教育的成年人组成,平均年龄为 36 岁。42 名参与者完成了 A 测试单元,以研究任务的收敛效度;36 名参与者完成了 B 测试单元,以研究任务的区分效度。测试结果采用重复测量方差分析、弗里德曼检验、配对样本 t 检验和相关分析进行分析:结果:PGNG 任务的第 3 级对持续注意、反应抑制和集合转换的要求更高。第 3 级任务与复杂 EFs 测量之间的一些中等相关性支持了该级 PGNG 任务的收敛有效性。而第 1 级和第 2 级的收敛有效性则得不到支持。PGNG水平与非EF测试之间没有发现明显的相关性,这支持了判别效度:我们的研究包括了一个受过高等教育的相当单一的样本,这可能是荷兰语版 PGNG 任务第 3 级的收敛有效性的原因。因此,为了克服这些潜在的干扰因素,荷兰版 PGNG 任务应在年龄和教育水平方面更具异质性的人群中进行调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Pilot Study of the Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Dutch Version of the Parametric Go/No-Go Task.

Background: The parametric go/no-go (PGNG) task is a computerized task that is designed to measure cognitive flexibility, response inhibition, and working memory. The PGNG task has been shown to measure core executive functions (EFs) in a psychometrically sound, brief, and ecologically valid manner.

Objective: To analyze the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the PGNG task in a convenience sample of nonclinical adults.

Method: The sample consisted of 74 highly educated adults, with an average age of 36 years. Forty-two participants completed test battery A to investigate the task's convergent validity; 36 participants completed test battery B to investigate the task's discriminant validity. The results were analyzed using a repeated-measures ANOVA, Friedman's test, paired-samples t test, and correlation analyses.

Results: Level 3 of the PGNG task places increased demands on sustained attention, response inhibition, and set-shifting. Several moderate correlations between level 3 and a complex EFs measure supported the convergent validity of this level of the PGNG task. The convergent validity of levels 1 and 2 was not supported. No significant correlations were found between PGNG levels and non-EF tests, supporting discriminant validity.

Conclusion: Our study included a rather homogenous sample of highly educated participants, which might explain the convergent validity of level 3 of the Dutch version of the PGNG task. Hence, to overcome these potentially confounding factors, the Dutch version of the PGNG task should be investigated in a larger and more heterogeneous population in terms of age and educational level.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
68
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology (CBN) is a forum for advances in the neurologic understanding and possible treatment of human disorders that affect thinking, learning, memory, communication, and behavior. As an incubator for innovations in these fields, CBN helps transform theory into practice. The journal serves clinical research, patient care, education, and professional advancement. The journal welcomes contributions from neurology, cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology, neuropsychiatry, and other relevant fields. The editors particularly encourage review articles (including reviews of clinical practice), experimental and observational case reports, instructional articles for interested students and professionals in other fields, and innovative articles that do not fit neatly into any category. Also welcome are therapeutic trials and other experimental and observational studies, brief reports, first-person accounts of neurologic experiences, position papers, hypotheses, opinion papers, commentaries, historical perspectives, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Voluntary Swallowing Initiation Difficulty After Dorsomedial Prefrontal Cortex Damage: A Case Report. The Turkish Version of the Revised Nottingham Sensory Assessment: Validity and Reliability in Chronic Stroke Survivors. The Impact of Lexical-semantic Impairment on Spoken Verb Production in Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment. Associations Between Intertemporal Food Choice and BMI in Adult Women: An fMRI Study Using a Quasi-realistic Design. Psychotropic Polypharmacy Leading to Reversible Dementia: A Case Report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1