4 results
89 Detecting Feigned Cognitive Impairment Using Pupillometry on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test for Words
- Sarah D Patrick, Lisa J Rapport, Robin A Hanks, Robert J Kanser
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 761-762
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Traditional methods of assessing performance validity have numerous weaknesses, among them, results can be consciously manipulated by examinees who wish to feign cognitive impairment. This study tested the ability of pupillary dilation patterns during a performance validity test (PVT) to enhance diagnostic accuracy in discriminating true from feigned impairment of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Pupillometry provides information about physiological and psychological processes related to cognitive load, familiarity, and deception and is outside of conscious control. Patrick, Rapport, Kanser, Hanks, and Bashem (2021) established proof of concept for the utility of pupillometry with PVTs applied to the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). This study replicated and extended this work by evaluating the incremental utility of pupillary-derived indices on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test for Words (RMT).
Participants and Methods:Participants included 214 adults in three groups: adults with bona fide TBI (TBI; n = 51) healthy comparisons instructed to perform their best (HC; n = 72), and healthy adults instructed and incentivized to simulate cognitive impairment due to TBI (SIM; n = 91). Moreover, this study examined pupillary pattern differences among successful (i.e., failed < 1 PVT and performed impaired on cognitive tests) and unsuccessful (i.e., failed > 2 PVTs or did not score impaired on a cognitive test) SIM, including SIM who did and did not fail the RMT. The RMT was administered in the context of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Indices included two pure pupil dilation (PD) indices: a simple measure of baseline arousal (PD-Baseline) and a nuanced measure of dynamic engagement (PD-Range). A pupillo-behavioral index was also evaluated: Dilation-response inconsistency (DRI) captured the frequency with which examinees displayed a pupillary familiarity response to the correct answer but selected the unfamiliar stimulus (incorrect answer).
Results:The results generally replicated Patrick et al. (2021), as all three indices were useful in discriminating between groups and provided incremental utility to traditional accuracy scores. PD-Baseline appeared sensitive to oculomotor dysfunction due to TBI (i.e., increasing accurate identification of that group); adults with TBI displayed significantly lower chronic arousal as compared to the two groups of healthy adults (SIM, HC). In fact, the TBI group showed significantly lower PD-Baseline than both unsuccessful simulators who were detected as feigners and successful simulators who passed PVTs but effectively feigned TBI on other tests. Dynamic engagement (PD-Range) yielded a hierarchical structure such that SIM were more dynamically engaged than TBI followed by HC. As predicted, simulators engaged in DRI significantly more frequently than other groups. Moreover, DRI added unique information to RMT accuracy in classifying unsuccessful simulators from all other groups. Each of these three pupillary indices showed large effect sizes, and logistic regressions indicated that each contributed unique variance in predicting group membership on one or more of the paired contrasts (i.e., SIM-TBI, SIM-HC, HC-TBI).
Conclusions:Taken together, the findings support continued research on the application of pupillometry to performance validity assessment: Pupillometry provided unique information in enhancing classification accuracy beyond traditional PVT accuracy scores. Overall, the findings highlight the promise of biometric indices in multimethod assessments of performance validity.
38 Assessing Memory for Emotions Separately from Emotion Recognition
- Gavin Sanders, Lisa J. Rapport, Robiann Broomfield, Sarah D. Patrick, Emily Flores, Robin A. Hanks, Mark A. Lumley, Scott A. Langenecker, Lauren J. Radigan
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 826-827
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Accurate processing of facial displays of emotion is critical for effective communication. A robust literature has documented impairment in the ability to recognize facial affect in people with traumatic brain injury (TBI), but research is scarce about memory for facial affect. Disruptions in recognizing and remembering the emotions of others can undermine relationship quality and may result in psychosocial dysfunction. Importantly, the extant literature indicates that facial affect recognition dissociates from other cognitive abilities such that it is likely a distinct neuronal process. Thus, explicit measurement of affect recognition and memory for emotions may be critical for implementing and refining rehabilitation interventions. The present study examined the relationship between recognition and memory for emotions using a novel computerized task and explored its associations with other cognitive abilities.
Participants and Methods:Participants were adults who were neurologically healthy (n = 31) or had a history of moderate to severe TBI (n = 26). The battery included the novel Assessment of Facial Affect Recognition and Memory (AFARM), Cambridge Face Memory Test (face memory without emotion), Wechsler Test of Adult Reading, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Judgment of Line Orientation, Oral Symbol Digit Modalities, Digit Span, FAS, Animal Fluency, and the Affect Intensity Measure (experienced emotion). Spearman correlations examined the relationship of AFARM performance with the test battery. Logistic regression models examined whether immediate-delay (ID-EM) and long-delay face emotion-memory (LD-EM) accounted for unique variance in group membership beyond recognition accuracy of facial affect and memory for faces.
Results:AFARM demonstrated relationships with neuropsychological and mood variables in the expected directions across and within groups, with the strongest associations observed for memory for verbal information (rs = .51 to .58) and processing speed (rs = .48 to .57). Consistent with traditional list-learning tests, ID- and LD-EM were highly correlated (r = .85). Experienced affect intensity was inversely associated with ID-EM (r = -.29) and LD-EM (r = -.38) but not with recognition accuracy (r = -.10). Logistic regression examining ID-EM was significant, χ2(3) = 26.05, p < .001, Nagelkerke R2 = .49. ID-EM accounted for unique variance in group status (p = .006; OR = 0.65) after accounting for recognition accuracy and face memory. Similarly, the model examining LD-EM was significant χ2(3) = 27.70, p < .001, Nagelkerke R2 = .43; LD-EM was significant after accounting for other variables (p = .017; OR = 0.69).
Conclusions:The findings are consistent with the hypothesis that memory for emotions represents a unique component of social cognition that is separate from recognition. Accuracy in identifying emotions, face recognition memory, and memory for emotions are strongly related but not wholly redundant processes. Consistent with prior literature, subjective experience of emotion had substantial effects on objective performance tasks, indicating that an individual's intense experience of their own emotions can disrupt sensitivity to the emotions of others. Future research should assess the extent to which memory for emotions relates to psychosocial outcomes such as the quality and quantity of interpersonal relationships.
Chapter 18 - English Dictionaries and Corpus Linguistics
- from Twentieth and Twenty-First-Century Dictionaries
- Edited by Sarah Ogilvie, University of Oxford
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Companion to English Dictionaries
- Published online:
- 18 September 2020
- Print publication:
- 24 September 2020, pp 219-239
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Every reputable new English dictionary, or new edition, published since 1987 has made use of a large collection of text, or ‘corpus’, for evidence of a word’s usage. In this chapter, one of the most eminent names in lexicography, Patrick Hanks, takes the reader on a journey to discover more about different kinds of dictionaries and corpora, and basic principles of corpus linguistics and lexicography. He outlines how dictionaries have made use of corpus evidence in the past, and proposes how they might make better use of them in the future.
Contributors
-
- By Avishek Adhikari, Susanne E. Ahmari, Anne Marie Albano, Carlos Blanco, Desiree K. Caban, Jonathan S. Comer, Jeremy D. Coplan, Ana Alicia De La Cruz, Emily R. Doherty, Bruce Dohrenwend, Amit Etkin, Brian A. Fallon, Michael B. First, Abby J. Fyer, Angela Ghesquiere, Jay A. Gingrich, Robert A. Glick, Joshua A. Gordon, Ethan E. Gorenstein, Marco A. Grados, James P. Hambrick, James Hanks, Kelli Jane K. Harding, Richard G. Heimberg, Rene Hen, Devon E. Hinton, Myron A. Hofer, Matthew J. Kaplowitz, Sharaf S. Khan, Donald F. Klein, Karestan C. Koenen, E. David Leonardo, Roberto Lewis-Fernández, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, Michael R. Liebowitz, Sarah H. Lisanby, Antonio Mantovani, John C. Markowitz, Patrick J. McGrath, Caitlin McOmish, Jeffrey M. Miller, Jan Mohlman, Elizabeth Sagurton Mulhare, Philip R. Muskin, Navin Arun Natarajan, Yuval Neria, Nicole R. Nugent, Mayumi Okuda, Mark Olfson, Laszlo A. Papp, Sapana R. Patel, Anthony Pinto, Kristin Pontoski, Jesse W. Richardson-Jones, Carolyn I. Rodriguez, Steven P. Roose, Moira A. Rynn, Franklin Schneier, M. Katherine Shear, Ranjeeb Shrestha, Helen Blair Simpson, Smit S. Sinha, Natalia Skritskaya, Jami Socha, Eun Jung Suh, Gregory M. Sullivan, Anthony J. Tranguch, Hilary B. Vidair, Tor D. Wager, Myrna M Weissman, Noelia V. Weisstaub
- Edited by Helen Blair Simpson, Columbia University, New York, Yuval Neria, Columbia University, New York, Roberto Lewis-Fernández, Columbia University, New York, Franklin Schneier, Columbia University, New York
-
- Book:
- Anxiety Disorders
- Published online:
- 10 November 2010
- Print publication:
- 26 August 2010, pp vii-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation