4.7 Article

California Verbal Learning Test: performance by patients with focal frontal and non-frontal lesions

期刊

BRAIN
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 1493-1503

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awg128

关键词

list learning; memory; frontal lobe; recognition memory; strategic deficits

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although frontal lobe lesions do not cause classic amnesia, they may disrupt learning and memory in a number of ways. To investigate in finer detail the regions of frontal injury that are associated with impaired learning and to define the cognitive processing deficits specific to each region that disrupt memory, we compared 33 patients with focal frontal injury with patients with non-frontal injury and with normal controls on a standard neuropsychological instrument, the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT). Subgroups of patients with distinct lesion site profiles were compared in a number of learning measures. All of the subgroups of patients with frontal lesions (with one exception) had inefficient learning due to poor implementation of a strategy of subjective organization. Despite this organizational deficiency, the performance of patients with frontopolar lesions normalized across trials. Only the subgroups with lesions centred either on the left posterior dorsolateral frontal region or the posterior medial frontal region had overall impaired learning and recall. The left posterior dorsolateral frontal group was most significantly impaired on all measures. This recall impairment was secondary to a mild lexical-semantic deficit. A recognition memory deficit in the same group was due to an abnormal response bias. Several groups had a modest increase in perseverative recalls; the underlying mechanisms differed. Disruption of different cognitive processes associated with specific frontal regions underlies the varied patterns of memory impairment. This study has demonstrated even finer differentiations within the frontal region than previously known.

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

4.7
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