Visual attentional assessment in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease based on a theory of visual attention [Elektronische Ressource] / vorgelegt von Petra Redel

Petra Redel

Sujets

• Psychologie

Informations

• Publié par: ludwig-maximilians-universitat_munchen
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2009
• Nombre de lectures: 9
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 5 Mo

Extrait

Visual attentional assessment in
mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease
based on a theory of visual attention
PETRA REDEL


























November 2009


II

Allgemeine und Experimentelle Psychologie/ Neuro-Cognitive Psychology
Department Psychologie
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Direktor: Prof. Dr. Hermann J. Müller




Visual attentional assessment in
mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease
based on a theory of visual attention


Inaugural-Dissertation
zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades
der Philosophie
an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München

vorgelegt von
PETRA REDEL
aus Eichstätt
November 2009





1. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Hermann J. Müller
2. Gutachterin: Prof. Dr. Kristina Hennig-Fast
Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 22.12.2009

III

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... VII
List of abbreviations and technical terms ....... VIII
List of figures ..................... IX
List of tables ........................................................................................................................ X
List of test instructions ........................................................................................................ X
List of clinical tests ............. X

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 12
2. SYNOPSIS ......................................................................................................... 15
2.1. Study 1 .................... 16
2.2. Study 2 ................................................................ 17
2.3. Study 3 .................................................... 18
2.4. Conclusions and outlook ........................................................................................ 19
3. THEORY OF VISUAL ATTENTION (TVA) ................................................ 21
3.1. Basic assumptions and equations ........................................... 21
3.1.1. Single stimulus identification ................. 23
3.1.2. Selection from multi-element displays ................................................................... 24
3.1.2.1. Equation 1 – rate equation ......... 24
3.1.2.2. Equation 2 – weight equation .... 25
3.2. A neural theory of visual attention (NTVA) .......................................................... 26
3.3. TVA-based attentional assessment ......................................................................... 27
3.3.1. Whole and partial report paradigms ........ 27
3.3.2. Advantages .............................................. 29
4. STUDY 1: VISUAL PROCESSING CAPACITY IN MCI AND AD .......... 31
4.1. Abstract ................................................................................................................... 31
4.2. Introduction and aim of the study ........... 32 IV

4.3. Method .................................................................................................................... 37
4.3.1. Subjects ................... 37
4.3.2. Whole report paradigm ........................... 39
4.3.2.1. Task ........................................................................................................... 39
4.3.2.2. Procedure ... 40
4.3.2.3. Stimuli ....... 41
4.3.2.4. Apparatus ................................................................................................... 42
4.3.3. Estimation of TVA parameters ............... 42
4.4. Results .................................................................................................................... 43
4.4.1. Raw data .................. 43
4.4.2. TVA parameter estimates........................ 44
4.4.2.1. Perceptual threshold: Parameter t ............................................................. 45 0
4.4.2.2. Iconic memory: Parameter μ...................................... 46
4.4.2.3. Processing speed: Parameter C .. 47
4.4.2.4. VSTM storage capacity: Parameter K ....................................................... 47
4.4.3. Effect of acetylcholine esterase inhibitor medication ............. 48
4.4.4. Relationship to disease duration ............................................................................. 49
4.4.5. Relationship to indices of cognitive function ......................... 49
4.5. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 50
4.5.1. Deficits of pre-attentive processing ........ 51
4.5.2. Deficits of attentive processing ............... 53
4.5.3. Relationship to other clinical and cognitive measures ............................................ 55
4.5.4. Limitations .............................................................................. 57
4.5.5. Conclusions ............. 58
5. STUDY 2: VISUAL ATTENTIONAL SELECTION IN MCI AND AD .... 60
5.1. Abstract ................................................................................................................... 60
5.2. Introduction and aim of the study ........... 61
5.3. Method .................................................................................................................... 65
5.3.1. Subjects ................... 65
5.3.2. Partial report paradigm ........................... 68
5.3.2.1. Task ........................................................................................................... 69
5.3.2.2. Procedure ... 69
5.3.2.3. Stimuli ....... 70
5.3.2.4. Apparatus ................................................................................................... 70 V

5.3.3. Estimation of TVA-based parameters ..................................................................... 70
5.3.3.1. Task-related weighting .............. 71
5.3.3.2. Spatial weighting ....................................................................................... 71
5.3.3.3. Sensory effectiveness ................ 72
5.4. Results .................................................... 73
5.4.1. Task-related weighting ............................................................................................ 74
5.4.1.1. Raw data .................................... 74
5.4.1.2. TVA parameter estimates .......................................... 77
5.4.2. Spatial weighting and sensory effectiveness ........................................................... 77
5.4.2.1. Raw data .................................................................... 78
5.4.2.2. TVA parameter estimates .......................................... 80
5.4.3. Parameter inter-correlation ..................................................... 82
5.4.4. Relationship of partial report parameters to external clinical measures ................. 83
5.4.5. Relationsrtial report parameters to measures of cognitive function ......... 83
5.4.6. Effect of ApoE4 genotype ...................................................................................... 83
5.5. Discussion ............................................... 86
5.5.1. Impairments in task-related weighting .................................................................... 87
5.5.2. Impairments in spatial weighting ............ 88
5.5.3. Effect of ApoE4 genotype ...................................................................................... 90
5.5.4. Limitations of the study .......................... 91
5.5.5. Conclusions ............................................. 91
6. STUDY 3: SPATIAL WEIGHTING AND INTERHEMISPHERIC
METABOLIC IMBALANCE ACROSS MCI AND AD ............................... 93
6.1. Abstract ................................................................................................................... 93
6.2. Introduction and aim of the study ........... 94
6.3. Method .................................................................................................................... 96
6.3.1. Subjects ................... 96
6.3.2. Whole and partial report paradigm ......................................................................... 98
6.3.3. Estimation of TVA-based parameters ..... 98
186.3.4. FDG-PET measurement ....................................................................................... 99
6.3.4.1. Between-group and between-hemisphere comparisons ............................ 99
6.3.4.2. Multiple regression model of PET-based measurements onto TVA
parameters ............................................................................................... 100
6.3.4.3. Metabolic laterality index ........................................ 101 VI

6.4. Results .................................................................................................................. 102
6.4.1. AD-typical hypometabolism across MCI and AD patients .................................. 102
6.4.2. Task-rel