No abstract

We compared visual priming and comparison tasks to assess information processing of a stimulus during the first 2 s after its onset. In both tasks, a 13-ms prime was followed at varying SOAs by a 40-ms probe. In the priming task, observers identified the probe as rapidly and accurately as possible; in the comparison task, observers determined as rapidly and accurately as possible whether or not the probe and prime were identical. Priming effects attained a maximum at an SOA of 133 ms and then declined monotonically to zero by 700 ms, indicating reliance on relatively brief visuosensory (iconic) memory. In contrast, the comparison effects yielded a multiphasic function, showing a maximum at 0 ms followed by a minimum at 133 ms, followed in turn by a maximum at 240 ms and another minimum at 720 ms, and finally a third maximum at 1,200 ms before declining thereafter. The results indicate three stages of prime processing that we take to correspond to iconic visible persistence, iconic informational persistence, and visual working memory, with the first two used in the priming task and all three in the comparison task. These stages are related to stages presumed to underlie stimulus processing in other tasks, such as those giving rise to the attentional blink.

We investigated whether standardized neuropsychological tests and experimental cognitive paradigms measure the same cognitive faculties. Specifically, do neuropsychological tests commonly used to assess attention measure the same construct as attention paradigms used in cognitive psychology and neuroscience? We built on the “general attention factor”, comprising several widely used experimental paradigms (Huang et al., 2012). Participants (n = 636) completed an on-line battery (TestMyBrain.org) of six experimental tests [Multiple Object Tracking, Flanker Interference, Visual Working Memory, Approximate Number Sense, Spatial Configuration Visual Search, and Gradual Onset Continuous Performance Task (Grad CPT)] and eight neuropsychological tests [Trail Making Test versions A & B (TMT-A, TMT-B), Digit Symbol Coding, Forward and Backward Digit Span, Letter Cancellation, Spatial Span, and Arithmetic]. Exploratory factor analysis in a subset of 357 participants identified a five-factor structure: (1) attentional capacity (Multiple Object Tracking, Visual Working Memory, Digit Symbol Coding, Spatial Span), (2) search (Visual Search, TMT-A, TMT-B, Letter Cancellation); (3) Digit Span; (4) Arithmetic; and (5) Sustained Attention (GradCPT). Confirmatory analysis in 279 held-out participants showed that this model fit better than competing models. A hierarchical model where a general cognitive factor was imposed above the five specific factors fit as well as the model without the general factor. We conclude that Digit Span and Arithmetic tests should not be classified as attention tests. Digit Symbol Coding and Spatial Span tap attentional capacity, while TMT-A, TMT-B, and Letter Cancellation tap search (or attention-shifting) ability. These five tests can be classified as attention tests.

Brain cancer is a common type of childhood malignancy, and radiotherapy (RT) is a mainstay of treatment. RT is effective for tumor eradication, and survival rates are high. However, RT damages the brain and disrupts ongoing developmental processes, resulting in debilitating cognitive “late” effects that may take years to fully manifest. These late effects likely derive from a long-term decrement in cell proliferation, combined with a neural environment that is hostile to plasticity, both of which are induced by RT. Long-term suppression of cell proliferation deprives the brain of the raw materials needed for optimum cognitive performance (such as new neurons in the hippocampus and new glia in frontal cortex), while chronic inflammation and dearth of trophic substances (such as growth hormone) limit neuroplastic potential in existing circuitry. Potential treatments for cognitive late effects should address both of these conditions. Exercise represents one such potential treatment, since it has the capacity to enhance cell proliferation, as well as to promote a neural milieu permissive for plasticity. Here, we review the evidence that cognitive late effects can be traced to RT-induced suppression of cell proliferation and hostile environmental conditions, as well as emerging evidence that exercise may be effective as an independent or adjuvant therapy.

A large body of evidence indicates that cancer survivors who have undergone chemotherapy have cognitive impairments. Substantial disagreement exists regarding which cognitive domains are impaired in this population. We suggest that is in part due to inconsistency in how neuropsychological tests are assigned to cognitive domains. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the meta-analytic literature on cancer-related cognitive impairments (CRCI) to quantify this inconsistency. We identified all neuropsychological tests reported in seven meta-analyses of the CRCI literature. Although effect sizes were generally negative (indicating impairment), every domain was declared to be impaired in at least one meta-analysis and unimpaired in at least one other meta-analysis. We plotted summary effect sizes from all the meta-analyses and quantified disagreement by computing the observed and ideal distributions of the one-way χ2 statistic. The actual χ2 distributions were noticeably more peaked and shifted to the left than the ideal distributions, indicating substantial disagreement among the meta-analyses in how neuropsychological tests were categorized to domains. A better understanding of the profile of impairments in CRCI is essential for developing effective remediation methods. To accomplish this goal, the research field needs to promote better agreement on how to measure specific cognitive functions.