Literature DB >> 12591025

Divided attention, selective attention and drawing: processing preferences in Williams syndrome are dependent on the task administered.

Emily K Farran1, Christopher Jarrold, Susan E Gathercole.   

Abstract

The visuo-spatial abilities of individuals with Williams syndrome (WS) have consistently been shown to be generally weak. These poor visuo-spatial abilities have been ascribed to a local processing bias by some [R. Rossen, E.S. Klima, U. Bellugi, A. Bihrle, W. Jones, Interaction between language and cognition: evidence from Williams syndrome, in: J. Beitchman, N. Cohen, M. Konstantareas, R. Tannock (Eds.), Language, Learning and Behaviour disorders: Developmental, Behavioural and Clinical Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 367-392] and conversely, to a global processing bias by others [Psychol. Sci. 10 (1999) 453]. In this study, two identification versions and one drawing version of the Navon hierarchical processing task, a non-verbal task, were employed to investigate this apparent contradiction. The two identification tasks were administered to 21 individuals with WS, 21 typically developing individuals, matched by non-verbal ability, and 21 adult participants matched to the WS group by mean chronological age (CA). The third, drawing task was administered to the WS group and the typically developing (TD) controls only. It was hypothesised that the WS group would show differential processing biases depending on the type of processing the task was measuring. Results from two identification versions of the Navon task measuring divided and selective attention showed that the WS group experienced equal interference from global to local as from local to global levels, and did not show an advantage of one level over another. This pattern of performance was broadly comparable to that of the control groups. The third task, a drawing version of the Navon task, revealed that individuals with WS were significantly better at drawing the local form in comparison to the global figure, whereas the typically developing control group did not show a bias towards either level. In summary, this study demonstrates that individuals with WS do not have a local or a global processing bias when asked to identify stimuli, but do show a local bias in their drawing abilities. This contrast may explain the apparently contrasting findings from previous studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12591025     DOI: 10.1016/s0028-3932(02)00219-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  12 in total

1.  Auditory attention to frequency and time: an analogy to visual local-global stimuli.

Authors:  Timothy Justus; Alexandra List
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2005-01-06

2.  Attentional disengagement in adults with Williams syndrome.

Authors:  Miriam D Lense; Alexandra P Key; Elisabeth M Dykens
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 3.  Neurodevelopmental and behavioral issues in Williams syndrome.

Authors:  Sarah J Paterson; Robert T Schultz
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.285

4.  Dissociating intuitive physics from intuitive psychology: Evidence from Williams syndrome.

Authors:  Frederik S Kamps; Joshua B Julian; Peter Battaglia; Barbara Landau; Nancy Kanwisher; Daniel D Dilks
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2017-07-03

5.  Rethinking the concepts of 'local or global processors': evidence from Williams syndrome, Down syndrome, and Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Authors:  Dean D'Souza; Rhonda Booth; Monica Connolly; Francesca Happé; Annette Karmiloff-Smith
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2015-05-25

6.  Mathematical skill in individuals with Williams syndrome: evidence from a standardized mathematics battery.

Authors:  Kirsten O'Hearn; Barbara Landau
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 7.  Defining the social phenotype in Williams syndrome: a model for linking gene, the brain, and behavior.

Authors:  Anna Järvinen-Pasley; Ursula Bellugi; Judy Reilly; Debra L Mills; Albert Galaburda; Allan L Reiss; Julie R Korenberg
Journal:  Dev Psychopathol       Date:  2008

8.  Human versus non-human face processing: evidence from Williams syndrome.

Authors:  Andreia Santos; Delphine Rosset; Christine Deruelle
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2009-06-26

9.  A direct comparison of local-global integration in autism and other developmental disorders: implications for the central coherence hypothesis.

Authors:  Inês Bernardino; Susana Mouga; Joana Almeida; Marieke van Asselen; Guiomar Oliveira; Miguel Castelo-Branco
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Williams syndrome and its cognitive profile: the importance of eye movements.

Authors:  Jo Van Herwegen
Journal:  Psychol Res Behav Manag       Date:  2015-06-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.