Shannon M Sisco1, Elizabeth Slonena2, Michael S Okun3, Dawn Bowers2,3, Catherine C Price2. 1. a Department of Psychology , Veterans Affairs Illiana Health Care System , Danville , IL , USA. 2. b Department of Clinical and Health Psychology , University of Florida , Gainesville , FL , USA. 3. c Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, Department of Neurology , University of Florida , Gainesville , FL , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Processing speed alters the traditional Stroop calculations of interference. Consequently, alternative algorithms for calculating Stroop interference have been introduced to control for processing speed, and have done so in a multiple sclerosis sample. This study examined how these processing speed correction algorithms change interference scores for individuals with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD, n = 58) and non-PD peers (n = 68). METHOD: Linear regressions controlling for demographics predicted group (PD vs. non-PD) differences for Jensen's, Golden's, relative, ratio, and residualized interference scores. To examine convergent and divergent validity, interference scores were correlated with standardized measures of processing speed and executive function. RESULTS: PD-non-PD differences were found for Jensen's interference score, but not Golden's score, or the relative, ratio, and residualized interference scores. Jensen's score correlated significantly with standardized processing speed but not executive function measures. Relative, ratio, and residualized scores correlated with executive function but not processing speed measures. Golden's score did not correlate with any other standardized measures. CONCLUSIONS: The relative, ratio, and residualized scores were comparable for measuring Stroop interference in processing speed-impaired populations. Overall, the ratio interference score may be the most useful calculation method to control for processing speed in this population.
OBJECTIVE: Processing speed alters the traditional Stroop calculations of interference. Consequently, alternative algorithms for calculating Stroop interference have been introduced to control for processing speed, and have done so in a multiple sclerosis sample. This study examined how these processing speed correction algorithms change interference scores for individuals with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD, n = 58) and non-PD peers (n = 68). METHOD: Linear regressions controlling for demographics predicted group (PD vs. non-PD) differences for Jensen's, Golden's, relative, ratio, and residualized interference scores. To examine convergent and divergent validity, interference scores were correlated with standardized measures of processing speed and executive function. RESULTS:PD-non-PD differences were found for Jensen's interference score, but not Golden's score, or the relative, ratio, and residualized interference scores. Jensen's score correlated significantly with standardized processing speed but not executive function measures. Relative, ratio, and residualized scores correlated with executive function but not processing speed measures. Golden's score did not correlate with any other standardized measures. CONCLUSIONS: The relative, ratio, and residualized scores were comparable for measuring Stroop interference in processing speed-impaired populations. Overall, the ratio interference score may be the most useful calculation method to control for processing speed in this population.
Authors: M Baldereschi; A Di Carlo; W A Rocca; P Vanni; S Maggi; E Perissinotto; F Grigoletto; L Amaducci; D Inzitari Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-11-14 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Pekka Jokinen; Mira Karrasch; Anna Brück; Jarkko Johansson; Jörgen Bergman; Juha O Rinne Journal: J Neurol Sci Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 3.181
Authors: Melissa A Rosenkranz; Douglas C Dean; Barbara B Bendlin; Nizar N Jarjour; Stephane Esnault; Henrik Zetterberg; Amanda Heslegrave; Michael D Evans; Richard J Davidson; William W Busse Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2021-09-15 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Marisa Borges Ferreira; Paulo Alexandre Pereira; Marta Parreira; Ines Sousa; José Figueiredo; João José Cerqueira; Antonio Filipe Macedo Journal: PeerJ Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Erwin E H van Wegen; Mark A Hirsch; Wilma D J van de Berg; Chris Vriend; Marc B Rietberg; Mark A Newman; Tim Vanbellingen; Odile A van den Heuvel Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 4.003