4.5 Article

The cognitive and neuroanatomical correlates of multitasking

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 38, 期 6, 页码 848-863

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00134-7

关键词

frontal lobes; strategy application disorder; prospective memory; structural equation modelling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patients who show the strategy application disorder can show deficits restricted to situations requiring multitasking, but the precise neuroanatomical and cognitive correlates of this problem have been rarely investigated. In this study, 60 people with circumscribed cerebral lesions and 60 age- and IQ-matched controls were given a multitasking procedure which allowed consideration of the relative contributions of task learning and remembering, planning, plan-following and remembering one's actions to multitasking performance. Lesions to the left posterior cingulate and forceps major legions gave deficits on all measures except planning. Remembering task contingencies after a delay was also affected by lesions in the region of the left anterior cingulate, and rule-breaking and failures of task switching were additionally found in people with lesions affecting the medial and more polar aspects of Brodmann's areas 8, 9 and especially 10. Planning deficits were associated with lesions to the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (RDLPFC). A theory of the relationships between the cognitive constructs underpinning multitasking was tested using structural equation modelling. The results suggest that there are three primary constructs that support multitasking: retrospective memory, prospective memory, and planning, with the second two drawing upon the products of the first. It is tentatively suggested that the left anterior and posterior cingulates together play some part in the retrospective memory demands, while the prospective memory and planning components make demands on processes supported by the left areas 8, 9 and 10 and the RDLPFC respectively. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science 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

4.5
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