4.2 Article

Age-related decrements in performance on a brief continuous performance test

期刊

ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 575-586

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.acn.2004.12.008

关键词

continuous performance test; aging; impulsivity; inhibition; sustained; attention; selective attention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research has revealed age-related decrements in performance on a variety of attention-related tasks, including sustained attention, selective attention, and inhibition tasks (e.g., [Armstrong, C. (1997). Selective versus sustained attention: A continuous performance test revisited. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 11(1), 18-3 3; Chao, L. L. & Knight, R. T. (1997). Prefrontal deficits in attention and inhibitory control with aging. Cerebral Cortex, 7(1), 63-69; Deaton, J. E., & Parasuraman, R. (1993). Sensory and cognitive vigilance: Effects of age on performance and subjective workload. Human Performance, 6(1), 71-97]). The continuous performance test (CPT) is a well-recognized measure of sustained attention and impulsivity [Riccio, C. A., Reynolds, C. R., & Lowe, P. (200 1). Clinical applications of continuous performance tests: Measuring attention and impulsive responding in children and adults. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.]. In the following study, the influence of age on CPT performance was assessed. Thirty-two healthy adults (age 19-82) completed a brief K-A version of the CPT under clear and noisy trial conditions. Under both conditions, participants' accuracy on the CPT task decreased with age. In both conditions, the number of commission errors (including false alarms) increased significantly as age increased. This relationship differed with omission errors, as age accounted for a significant proportion of variance in omission errors under the noisy condition alone. Overall, this study provides evidence for age-related differences in performance on a brief CPT, particularly for deficits in selective response inhibition. (c) 2005 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据