4.5 Article

Event-related potential correlates of extradimensional and intradimensional set-shifts in a modified Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 1092, Issue -, Pages 138-151

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.03.098

Keywords

executive function; ERP; attentional set; set-shifting; extradimensional

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded in healthy adult participants during the performance of a modified version of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test that was designed to isolate the effects of extradimensional (ED) and intradimensional (ID) set-shifts. ERP averages were created for ED- and ID-Shift trials, as well as for the 5th trial in each block (Maintain-Rule). Differences in sensory and longer latency ERP components were found between the ED- and ID conditions, and between the: two shift conditions and the Maintain-Rule trials. Consistent with the previous literature, these data indicated that ED- and ID-Shifts require different levels of neural resources. A secondary goal of this experiment was to use the excellent temporal resolution of ERPs to examine the neural correlates of various other aspects of the performance of a set-shift task, including differences between correct shifts and the commission of errors, and the differences between the reception of correct and error feedback. Comparisons were made between ERP averages to correct ED-Shift trials and ED-Error trials, and to feedback following a correct ED-Shift compared to feedback following an error. As expected, ERP differences were found between correct trials and error trials, and between the ERP correlates of receiving different types of feedback. Overall, these data further indicate the utility of using ERP methodology to study various aspects of complex neuropsychological paradigms. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available