ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology2019
Alzheimer's disease and the processing of uncertainty during choice task performance: Executive dysfunction within the Hick-Hyman law.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Hick-Hyman law states that choice response time (RT) increases linearly with increasing information uncertainty. Neuroimaging studies suggest that the representation of uncertainty in support of response generation is mediated by the cognitive control network (CCN), which is disrupted in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Thus, we predicted that patients with AD would be sensitive to increased uncertainty particularly under conditions that place demands on the internal representation of uncertainty, and that choice RT performance under these conditions would be associated with performance on tests of executive function. Cognitively normal older adults (CN) and patients with AD completed card-sorting tasks that separately manipulated either externally cued uncertainty (i.e., number of sorting piles with a fixed probability of each stimulus type) or more internally driven uncertainty (i.e., the probability of each stimulus type with a fixed number of sorting piles). Consistent with our predictions, AD patients were impaired relative to CN particularly on the internally driven uncertainty task, and RT in this task was associated with performance on neuropsychological measures of executive functioning but not episodic memory. We suggest that this pattern of findings is consistent with presumed disruptions to the CCN in AD and provides neuropsychological evidence in support of the role of the CCN in the representation of uncertainty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.