BACKGROUND: We sought to develop a Dot Pattern Expectancy task (DPX) to assess goal maintenance for use in clinical trials. Altering the standard task created 5 versions of the DPX to compare-a standard version and 4 others. Alterations in the interstimulus interval (ISI) length and the strength of a learned prepotent response distinguished the different tasks. These adjustments were designed to decrease administration time and/or improve reliability of the data. METHODS: We determined participant eligibility in an initial session (the first of 3) using clinical interviewing tools. The initial session also included a demographic assessment and assessments of community functioning and symptom severity. All versions of the DPX were administered, across 3 sessions. Specific deficits on the context processing compared with difficulty control condition were evaluated using mixed-effects logistic regression within a hierarchical linear model. RESULTS: We analyzed the data from 136 control participants and 138 participants with schizophrenia. Relative to a difficulty control condition, patients performed worse than controls on context processing conditions that required goal maintenance. ISI did not predict errors. Stronger prepotency was associated with increased errors in the difficulty control relative to context processing condition for controls, which improved the interpretability of findings for patients. Reliability was acceptable for a version of the task with a 10-minute running time. CONCLUSIONS: The best compromise between task duration and interpretability occurred on a version with a short ISI and a strong prepotency.
BACKGROUND: We sought to develop a Dot Pattern Expectancy task (DPX) to assess goal maintenance for use in clinical trials. Altering the standard task created 5 versions of the DPX to compare-a standard version and 4 others. Alterations in the interstimulus interval (ISI) length and the strength of a learned prepotent response distinguished the different tasks. These adjustments were designed to decrease administration time and/or improve reliability of the data. METHODS: We determined participant eligibility in an initial session (the first of 3) using clinical interviewing tools. The initial session also included a demographic assessment and assessments of community functioning and symptom severity. All versions of the DPX were administered, across 3 sessions. Specific deficits on the context processing compared with difficulty control condition were evaluated using mixed-effects logistic regression within a hierarchical linear model. RESULTS: We analyzed the data from 136 control participants and 138 participants with schizophrenia. Relative to a difficulty control condition, patients performed worse than controls on context processing conditions that required goal maintenance. ISI did not predict errors. Stronger prepotency was associated with increased errors in the difficulty control relative to context processing condition for controls, which improved the interpretability of findings for patients. Reliability was acceptable for a version of the task with a 10-minute running time. CONCLUSIONS: The best compromise between task duration and interpretability occurred on a version with a short ISI and a strong prepotency.
Authors: Keith H Nuechterlein; Michael F Green; Robert S Kern; Lyle E Baade; Deanna M Barch; Jonathan D Cohen; Susan Essock; Wayne S Fenton; Frederick J Frese; James M Gold; Terry Goldberg; Robert K Heaton; Richard S E Keefe; Helena Kraemer; Raquelle Mesholam-Gately; Larry J Seidman; Ellen Stover; Daniel R Weinberger; Alexander S Young; Steven Zalcman; Stephen R Marder Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2008-01-02 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Deanna M Barch; Marc G Berman; Randy Engle; Jessica Hurdelbrink Jones; John Jonides; Angus Macdonald; Derek Evan Nee; Thomas S Redick; Scott R Sponheim Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2008-11-05 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Cameron S Carter; Deanna M Barch; Robert W Buchanan; Ed Bullmore; John H Krystal; Jonathan Cohen; Mark Geyer; Michael Green; Keith H Nuechterlein; Trevor Robbins; Steven Silverstein; Edward E Smith; Milton Strauss; Til Wykes; Robert Heinssen Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2008-05-07 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Deanna M Barch; Cameron S Carter; Steve C Dakin; James Gold; Steven J Luck; Angus Macdonald; John D Ragland; Steven Silverstein; Milton E Strauss Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2011-11-17 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Deanna M Barch; Cameron S Carter; James M Gold; Sheri L Johnson; Ann M Kring; Angus W MacDonald; Diego A Pizzagalli; J Daniel Ragland; Steven M Silverstein; Milton E Strauss Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2017-04-13
Authors: Tara A Niendam; Tyler A Lesh; Jong Yoon; Andrew J Westphal; Natalie Hutchison; J Daniel Ragland; Marjorie Solomon; Michael Minzenberg; Cameron S Carter Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Julia M Sheffield; Grega Repovs; Michael P Harms; Cameron S Carter; James M Gold; Angus W MacDonald; J Daniel Ragland; Steven M Silverstein; Douglass Godwin; Deanna M Barch Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Amanda L Rodrigue; Jennifer E McDowell; Neeraj Tandon; Matcheri S Keshavan; Carol A Tamminga; Godfrey D Pearlson; John A Sweeney; Robert D Gibbons; Brett A Clementz Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2018-03-31
Authors: Gregory P Strauss; Emily S Kappenman; Adam J Culbreth; Lauren T Catalano; Kathryn L Ossenfort; Bern G Lee; James M Gold Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2014-12-08
Authors: A Owoso; C S Carter; J M Gold; A W MacDonald; J D Ragland; S M Silverstein; M E Strauss; D M Barch Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2013-03-25 Impact factor: 7.723