Author:
Yamagami Naohiko, ,Nagai Chiyoko,Saito Fumiaki,Sonoo Masahiro, , ,
Abstract
Inhibitory control exhibits a significant correlation with overall cognitive abilities. Past research largely measured disinhibition using experimental protocols, predominantly featuring healthy or youthful participants, or caregiver-supplied information, potentially neglecting an objective assessment of pronounced disinhibition within a naturalistic context. We posit that the observation of prominent disinhibition behaviors across various cognitive assessment tasks provides an objective measurement of innate disinhibition, bypassing the need for participant awareness or concentrated effort toward inhibition. The present study, designed as a secondary analysis of prior research, aims to explore the relationship between cognitive functions and observed disinhibition behavior during cognitive testing in patients exhibiting cognitive impairment symptoms. A retrospective analysis was performed on the records of 224 patients' cognitive tests, including recorded disinhibition behavior, without employing any exclusion criteria. Findings revealed that patients demonstrating at least one instance of disinhibition during testing presented significantly lower overall cognitive functions, excluding long-term memory, than their counterparts without disinhibition. Notably, multiple regression analysis identified comprehension and conceptualization abilities as significant predictors of disinhibition severity. These findings, aligning with earlier research, serve to strengthen the credibility of previous studies on this topic.
Subject
Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference23 articles.
1. Studies of corpus callosum;"1. Akelaitis;IV Diagonistic dyspraxia in epileptics following partial and complete section of the corpus callosum American Journal of Psychiatry,1945
2. 2. De Beni, R., Palladino, P., Pazzaglia, F., & Cornoldi, C. (1998). Increases in intrusion errors and working memory deficit of poor comprehenders. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51(2), 305-320. doi: 10.1080/713755761
3. 3. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 135-168. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
4. 4. Freud, S. (1955). The interpretation of dreams (J. Strachey, Ed. & Trans.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1900)
5. 5. Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2004). The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: A latent-variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 101-135. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.101