Cargando…

Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London

Planning on the 4-disk version of the Tower of London (TOL4) was examined in stroke patients and unimpaired controls. Overall TOL4 solution scores indicated impaired planning in the frontal stroke but not non-frontal stroke patients. Consistent with the claim that processing the relations between cu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andrews, Glenda, Halford, Graeme S., Chappell, Mark, Maujean, Annick, Shum, David H. K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4274981/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25566042
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01032
_version_ 1782350069974958080
author Andrews, Glenda
Halford, Graeme S.
Chappell, Mark
Maujean, Annick
Shum, David H. K.
author_facet Andrews, Glenda
Halford, Graeme S.
Chappell, Mark
Maujean, Annick
Shum, David H. K.
author_sort Andrews, Glenda
collection PubMed
description Planning on the 4-disk version of the Tower of London (TOL4) was examined in stroke patients and unimpaired controls. Overall TOL4 solution scores indicated impaired planning in the frontal stroke but not non-frontal stroke patients. Consistent with the claim that processing the relations between current states, intermediate states, and goal states is a key process in planning, the domain-general relational complexity metric was a good indicator of the experienced difficulty of TOL4 problems. The relational complexity metric shared variance with task-specific metrics of moves to solution and search depth. Frontal stroke patients showed impaired planning compared to controls on problems at all three complexity levels, but at only two of the three levels of moves to solution, search depth and goal ambiguity. Non-frontal stroke patients showed impaired planning only on the most difficult quaternary-relational and high search depth problems. An independent measure of relational processing (viz., Latin square task) predicted TOL4 solution scores after controlling for stroke status and location, and executive processing (Trail Making Test). The findings suggest that planning involves a domain-general capacity for relational processing that depends on the frontal brain regions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4274981
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42749812015-01-06 Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London Andrews, Glenda Halford, Graeme S. Chappell, Mark Maujean, Annick Shum, David H. K. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Planning on the 4-disk version of the Tower of London (TOL4) was examined in stroke patients and unimpaired controls. Overall TOL4 solution scores indicated impaired planning in the frontal stroke but not non-frontal stroke patients. Consistent with the claim that processing the relations between current states, intermediate states, and goal states is a key process in planning, the domain-general relational complexity metric was a good indicator of the experienced difficulty of TOL4 problems. The relational complexity metric shared variance with task-specific metrics of moves to solution and search depth. Frontal stroke patients showed impaired planning compared to controls on problems at all three complexity levels, but at only two of the three levels of moves to solution, search depth and goal ambiguity. Non-frontal stroke patients showed impaired planning only on the most difficult quaternary-relational and high search depth problems. An independent measure of relational processing (viz., Latin square task) predicted TOL4 solution scores after controlling for stroke status and location, and executive processing (Trail Making Test). The findings suggest that planning involves a domain-general capacity for relational processing that depends on the frontal brain regions. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4274981/ /pubmed/25566042 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01032 Text en Copyright © 2014 Andrews, Halford, Chappell, Maujean and Shum. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Andrews, Glenda
Halford, Graeme S.
Chappell, Mark
Maujean, Annick
Shum, David H. K.
Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title_full Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title_fullStr Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title_full_unstemmed Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title_short Planning Following Stroke: A Relational Complexity Approach Using the Tower of London
title_sort planning following stroke: a relational complexity approach using the tower of london
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4274981/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25566042
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01032
work_keys_str_mv AT andrewsglenda planningfollowingstrokearelationalcomplexityapproachusingthetoweroflondon
AT halfordgraemes planningfollowingstrokearelationalcomplexityapproachusingthetoweroflondon
AT chappellmark planningfollowingstrokearelationalcomplexityapproachusingthetoweroflondon
AT maujeanannick planningfollowingstrokearelationalcomplexityapproachusingthetoweroflondon
AT shumdavidhk planningfollowingstrokearelationalcomplexityapproachusingthetoweroflondon