2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.02.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are semantic and phonological fluency based on the same or distinct sets of cognitive processes? Insights from factor analyses in healthy adults and stroke patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…FAS performance requires the suppression of semantically or associatively related words [Katzev et al, 2013;Luo et al, 2010;Shao et al, 2014], and is hence typically thought to involve executive processes such as strategy, initiation, and selfmonitoring [Henry and Crawford, 2004]. Categorical fluency tasks (i.e., the FAS) require more cognitively demanding resources than semantic fluency tasks [Schmidt et al, 2017], as individuals within the latter can rely on pre-existing (sub-)categorical links to retrieve responses [Schmidt et al, 2017]. Distinct functional profiles are implicated during categorical and semantic fluency tasks [Birn et al, 2010;Katzev et al, 2013], along with differences in their expression with clinical populations and focal brain lesions [Henry and Crawford, 2004;Shao et al, 2014].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FAS performance requires the suppression of semantically or associatively related words [Katzev et al, 2013;Luo et al, 2010;Shao et al, 2014], and is hence typically thought to involve executive processes such as strategy, initiation, and selfmonitoring [Henry and Crawford, 2004]. Categorical fluency tasks (i.e., the FAS) require more cognitively demanding resources than semantic fluency tasks [Schmidt et al, 2017], as individuals within the latter can rely on pre-existing (sub-)categorical links to retrieve responses [Schmidt et al, 2017]. Distinct functional profiles are implicated during categorical and semantic fluency tasks [Birn et al, 2010;Katzev et al, 2013], along with differences in their expression with clinical populations and focal brain lesions [Henry and Crawford, 2004;Shao et al, 2014].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The verbal-abilities also assessed by the FAS (Controlled Oral Word Association Test) are closely related to those tapped into by the semantic fluency task, grouped within the language domain. The extant literature, however, from both healthy and clinical populations supports grouping the FAS and semantic fluency tasks into separate domains (Henry and Crawford, 2004;Schmidt, et al, 2017). FAS performance requires the suppression of semantically or associatively related words (Katzev, et al, 2013;Luo, et al, 2010;Shao, et al, 2014), and is hence typically thought to involve executive processes such as strategy, initiation, and self-monitoring (Henry and Crawford, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Categorical fluency tasks (i.e. the FAS) require more cognitively-demanding resources than semantic fluency tasks (Schmidt, et al, 2017), as individuals within the latter can rely on pre-existing (sub-)categorical links to retrieve responses (Schmidt, et al, 2017). Distinct functional profiles are implicated during categorical and semantic fluency tasks (Birn, et al, 2010;Katzev, et al, 2013), along with differences in their expression with clinical populations and focal brain lesions (Henry and Crawford, 2004;Shao, et al, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research provides evidence for intraindividual variability in cognitive control, as humans can adjust their bias towards persistence or flexibility (Dreisbach & Goschke, 2004;Zink et al, 2018). Various factors that promote particular biases have been identified, including mood (Dreisbach & Goschke, 2004), meditation-induced states (Colzato, Ozturk, & Hommel, 2012;Colzato, Sellaro, Samara, & Hommel, 2015;Colzato, Szapora, Lippelt, & Hommel, 2017;Colzato, van der Wel, Sellaro, & Hommel, 2016), and reward (Hefer & Dreisbach, 2016, 2017. Neuroscientific evidence suggests that such metacontrol biases (to use the terminology suggested by are regulated through the interplay of frontal and striatal dopaminergic pathways (Cools & D'Esposito, 2011;Cools, 2015) and/or the interplay between dopaminergic D1-receptors and D2-receptors (Durstewitz & Seamans, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%