We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Dunning-Krueger effect is a cognitive bias where individuals tend to overestimate their abilities in areas where they are less competent. The Cordoba Naming Test (CNT) is a 30-item confrontation naming task. Hardy and Wright (2018) conditionally validated a measure of perceived mental workload called the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Researchers reported that workload ratings on the NASA-TLX increased with increased task demands on a cognitive task. Anxiety is known as an emotion that can make an individual more susceptible to develop a mental health condition. We examine if the Dunning-Krueger effect occurs in a Mexican population with and without current symptoms of anxiety and possible factors driving individuals to overestimate their abilities on the CNT. We predicted the abnormal symptoms of anxiety (ASA) group would report better CNT performance, report higher perceived workloads on the CNT, and underperform on the CNT compared to the normal symptoms of anxiety (NSA) group. We also predicted the low-performance group would report better CNT performance, report higher perceived workloads on the CNT, and underperform on the CNT compared to the high-performance group.
Participants and Methods:
The sample consisted of 192 Mexican participants with NSA (79 low-performance & 113 high-performance) and 74 Mexican participants with ASA (44 low-performance & 30 high-performance). Participants completed the CNT, NASA-TLX, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in Spanish. The NASA-TLX was used to evaluate perceived workloads after the completion of the CNT. Meanwhile, the HADS was used to create our anxiety groups. Finally, CNT raw scores were converted into T-scores, which then were averaged to create the following two groups: low-performance (CNT T-Score <50) and high-performance (CNT T-Score 50+). A series of 2x2 ANCOVAs, controlling for gender were used to evaluate CNT performance and perceived workloads.
Results:
We found a significant interaction where the low-performance ASA and the high-performance NSA groups demonstrated better CNT performance and reported higher perceived workloads (i.e., performance, temporal demand) on the CNT compared to their respective counterparts (i.e., low-performance NSA & high-performance ASA groups), p's<.05, ηp's2=.02. We found a main effect where the high-performance group outperformed the low-performance group on the CNT and reported lower perceived workloads on the CNT, p's<.05, ηp's2 =.04-.46.
Conclusions:
The Dunning-Krueger effect did not occur in our sample. Participants that demonstrated better CNT performance also reported higher perceived workloads regardless of their current symptoms of anxiety. A possible explanation can be our sample's cultural norms of what would be considered as abnormal symptoms of anxiety, is a normal part of life, decreasing the possibilities to experience self-efficacy distoritions. Future studies should investigate whether the Dunning-Kruger effect may be influencing other aspects of cognitive functioning subjectively in Mexicans residing in Mexico and the United States with and without current symptoms of anxiety.
Verbal fluency tasks evaluate executive functioning by requiring a person to provide words within a certain time period that start with a certain letter (phonemic fluency) or category (semantic fluency). Research shows that age impacts test takers’ phonemic and semantic verbal fluency performance. In fact, it has been suggested that phonemic verbal fluency peaks around age 30 to 39 and begins to decline at older ages. In contrast to phonemic fluency, research suggests that semantic fluency increases steadily between test takers until age 12 and begins declining around age 20. A generation is a cohort of people born within a certain period who share age and experiences. Studies show that Generation X individuals (persons born between 1965-1980) outperform Generation Y (persons born between 19811995) and Generation Z individuals (persons born between 1965-1980) on the Cordoba Naming Test. To our knowledge, no study has investigated verbal fluency performance across generational groups. We predicted that Generation X individuals would outperform individuals from Generation Y and Z on both verbal fluency measures.
Participants and Methods:
The sample of the present study consisted of 107 participants with a mean age of 27.39 (SD = 9.16). Participants were divided into three groups: Generation X (n = 19), Generation Y (n = 52), and Generation Z (n = 36). The phonemic verbal fluency task consisted of three trials and the semantic verbal fluency task consisted of one trial, one minute each. A series of ANCOVAs with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to evaluate verbal fluency performance between generational groups. All participants passed performance validity testing.
Results:
We found significant differences between our generational groups on both verbal fluency tasks. Post-hoc tests revealed that the Generation Y group outperformed both Generation X and Z groups on both verbal fluency tasks, p’s <.05, np2 =.11 -.16. No significant differences were found on either verbal fluency task between the Generation X and Z groups.
Conclusions:
Contrary to our hypothesis, Generation Y individuals possessed better phonemic and semantic fluency than both Generation X and Z individuals. Meanwhile, Generation X individuals did not significantly differ on any of the verbal fluency tasks compared to Generation Z individuals. Speaking multiple languages has been shown to impact verbal fluency performance. In our sample, the Generation X and Z groups consisted primarily of bilingual speakers compared to the Generation Y group. Examining generational differences is essential to understand the unique characteristics and impact of the times in which various individuals have grown up. Future research, for instance, should evaluate the influence of bilingualism across generational groups on verbal fluency performance.
A commonly used confrontation naming task used in the United States is The Boston Naming Test (BNT). Performance differences has been found in Caucasian and ethnic minorities on the BNT. The Cordoba Naming Test (CNT) is a 30-item confrontation naming task developed in Argentina. Past research has shown acculturation levels can influence cognitive performance. Furthermore, one study evaluated geriatric gender differences on CNT performance in Spanish. Researchers reported that older male participants outperformed female participants on the CNT. To our knowledge, researchers have not evaluated ethnic differences on the CNT using a geriatric sample. The purpose of the present study was to examined CNT performance and acculturation in a Latinx and Caucasian geriatric sample. It was predicted the Caucasian group would outperform the Latinx group on the CNT. Moreover, the Caucasian group would report higher acculturation levels on the Abbreviated Multidimensional Acculturation Scale (AMAS) compared to the Latinx group.
Participants and Methods:
The sample consisted of 9 Latinx and 11 Caucasian participants with a mean age of 66.80 (SD =6.10), with an average of 14.30 (SD = 2.00) years of education. All participants were neurologically and psychologically healthy and completed the CNT and the AMAS in English. Acculturation was measured via the AMAS English subscales (i.e., English Language, United States. Identity, United States, Competency). A series of ANCOVAs, controlling for years of education completed and gender, was used to evaluate CNT performance and acculturation.
Results:
The ethnic groups were not well demographically matched (i.e., years of education and gender).We found that the Caucasian group outperformed the Latinx group on CNT performance p = .012, ηp 2 = .34. Furthermore, the Caucasian group reported higher acculturation levels (i.e., English Language, United States, Identity, United States, Competency) compared to the Latinx group p’s < .05, ηps2 = .42-.64.
Conclusions:
To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate CNT performance between ethnic groups with a geriatric sample. As expected the Caucasian group outperformed the Latinx group on the CNT. Also, as expected the Caucasian group reported higher English acculturation levels compared to the Latinx group. Our findings are consistent with past studies showing ethnic differences on confrontational naming performance (i.e., The Boston Naming Test), favoring Caucasians. A possible explanation for group differences could have been linguistic factors (e.g., speaking multiple languages) in our Latinx group. Therefore, since our Latinx group reported lower levels of English Language, United States identity, and United States competency the Latinx group assimilation towards United States culture might of influence their CNT performance. Future studies with different ethnic groups (e.g., African-Americans) and a larger sample size should examine if ethnic differences continue to cross-validate in a geriatric sample.
A 30-item confrontation naming test was developed in Argentina for Spanish speakers, The Cordoba Naming Test (CNT). The Boston Naming Test is an established confrontation naming task in the United States. Researchers have used the Boston Naming Test to identify individuals with different clinical pathologies (e.g., Alzheimer’s disease). The current literature on how Spanish speakers across various countries perform on confrontational naming tasks is limited. To our knowledge, one study investigated CNT performance across three Spanish-speaking countries (i.e., Argentina, Mexico, and Guatemala). Investigators found that the Guatemalan group underperformed on the CNT compared to the Argentine and Mexican groups. The purpose of this study was to extend the current literature and investigate CNT performance across five Spanish-speaking countries (i.e., Argentina, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, United States). We predicted that the Argentine group would outperform the other Spanish-speaking countries.
Participants and Methods:
The present study sample consisted of 502 neurologically and psychologically healthy participants with a mean age of 29.06 (SD = 13.41) with 14.75 years of education completed (SD = 3.01). Participants were divided into five different groups based on their country of birth and current country residency (i.e., United States, Mexico, Guatemala, Argentina, & Colombia). All participants consented to voluntary participation and completed the CNT and a comprehensive background questionnaire in Spanish. The CNT consisted of 30 black and white line drawings, ranging from easy to hard in difficulty. An ANCOVA, controlling for gender, education, and age, was used to evaluate CNT performance between the five Spanish-speaking country groups. Meanwhile, a Bonferroni post-hoc test was utilized to evaluate the significant differences between Spanish-speaking groups. We used a threshold of p < .05 for statistical significance.
Results:
Results revealed significant group differences between the five Spanish speaking groups on the CNT, p = .000, np2 = .48. Bonferroni post-hoc test revealed that the United States group significantly underperformed on the CNT compared to all the Spanish-speaking groups. Next, we found the Guatemalan group underperformed on the CNT compared to the Argentinian, Mexican, and Colombian groups. Additionally, we found the Argentinian group outperformed the Mexican, Guatemalan, and United States groups on the CNT. No significant differences were found between the Argentinian group and Colombian group or the Mexican group and Colombian group on the CNT.
Conclusions:
As predicted, the Argentinian group outperformed all the Spanish-speaking groups on the CNT except the Colombian group. Additionally, we found that the United States group underperformed on the CNT compared to all the Spanish-speaking groups. A possible explanation is that Spanish is not the official language in the United States compared to the rest of the Spanish-speaking groups. Meanwhile, a possible reason why the Argentinian and Colombian groups demonstrated better CNT performances might have been that it was less culturally sensitive than the United States, Mexican, and Guatemalan groups. Further analysis is needed with bigger sample sizes across other Spanish-speaking countries (e.g., Costa Rica, Chile) to evaluate what variables, if any, are influencing CNT performance.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.