Er vindt onderhoud plaats aan de Radboud Repository. Het is mogelijk dat uw zoekactie incomplete resultaten oplevert. Indien u publicaties wilt uploaden kunt u dit doen via de Upload Full Text button. Radboud Repository is undergoing maintenance. Please note that your search may produce incomplete results. If you would like to upload publications, you can do so by means of the Upload Full Text button.
Rule induction performance in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's dementia: Examining the role of simple and biconditional rule learning processes
Number of pages
SourceNeuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section A, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 39, 3, (2017), pp. 231-241
Article / Letter to editor
Display more detailsDisplay less details
SW OZ DCC NRP
Neuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section A, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology
SubjectDI-BCB_DCC_Theme 3: Plasticity and Memory; Neuropsychology and rehabilitation psychology; Radboudumc 1: Alzheimer`s disease DCMN: Donders Center for Medical Neuroscience; Neuro- en revalidatiepsychologie
INTRODUCTION: Rule induction tests such as the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test require executive control processes, but also the learning and memorization of simple stimulus-response rules. In this study, we examined the contribution of diminished learning and memorization of simple rules to complex rule induction test performance in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) or Alzheimer's dementia (AD). METHOD: Twenty-six aMCI patients, 39 AD patients, and 32 control participants were included. A task was used in which the memory load and the complexity of the rules were independently manipulated. This task consisted of three conditions: a simple two-rule learning condition (Condition 1), a simple four-rule learning condition (inducing an increase in memory load, Condition 2), and a complex biconditional four-rule learning condition-inducing an increase in complexity and, hence, executive control load (Condition 3). RESULTS: Performance of AD patients declined disproportionately when the number of simple rules that had to be memorized increased (from Condition 1 to 2). An additional increment in complexity (from Condition 2 to 3) did not, however, disproportionately affect performance of the patients. Performance of the aMCI patients did not differ from that of the control participants. In the patient group, correlation analysis showed that memory performance correlated with Condition 1 performance, whereas executive task performance correlated with Condition 2 performance. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that the reduced learning and memorization of underlying task rules explains a significant part of the diminished complex rule induction performance commonly reported in AD, although results from the correlation analysis suggest involvement of executive control functions as well. Taken together, these findings suggest that care is needed when interpreting rule induction task performance in terms of executive function deficits in these patients.
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.