000862369 001__ 862369
000862369 005__ 20210130001320.0
000862369 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/22436
000862369 037__ $$aFZJ-2019-02703
000862369 041__ $$aEnglish
000862369 1001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)172863$$aAmunts, Julia$$b0$$eCorresponding author
000862369 1112_ $$aEuropean Workshop on Cognitive Neuropsychology$$cBressanone$$d2019-01-20 - 2019-01-25$$gEWCN$$wItaly
000862369 245__ $$aWhich executive functions are involved in the different semantic fluency tasks? Results in healthy subjects
000862369 260__ $$c2018
000862369 3367_ $$033$$2EndNote$$aConference Paper
000862369 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOther
000862369 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aINPROCEEDINGS
000862369 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aconferenceObject
000862369 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aLECTURE_SPEECH
000862369 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)6$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aConference Presentation$$bconf$$mconf$$s1562827882_768$$xAfter Call
000862369 520__ $$aVerbal fluency (VF) tasks are well-established parts of executive function (EF) batteries commonly used in neuropsychological assessment. In particular, it is thought that this task can provide a general idea about individual EF capacities while using a simple and ecologically valid paradigm. Nevertheless, it is still an open question which EF ability is really being measured or proxied by a VF task. Additionally, the switching component of this test is less regularly applied than the simple semantic component, even though it has been argued that the former is better at tapping into EF [1]. The present study aims to examine which EF is mostly involved in each of the different VF tasks.We tested 108 monolingual German speaking healthy subjects (mean age 33.1; 45 males) with 11 EF tests and 3 VF tasks. The VF tests contained two simple semantic (animals, jobs) and one switching task (switching between sports and fruits). The sum of words was calculated for each of the two simple (t1, t2) and the switching task (t3). Moreover, a switching coefficient (SC) was computed (SC = (t1+t2) / t3). To detect whether the total sum or the SC is more sensitive to the EF we compared the correlations between these different VF measures with the performance in the EF tasks. In particular, relationships between verbal fluency assessed in all three VF tasks and performance in the EF tasks were computed with Spearman correlations across subjects.The comparison of the correlation calculations between the total sum of words and the SC with the EF tests showed that the SC correlates with three variables of the EF tests: The correct items of the Tower of London (rsp= -0.224, p= 0.01), the interference time in the Trail-Making Test (rsp= 0.221, p= 0.011) and the errors of incongruent items in the Cued-Task Switching (rsp= 0.178, p= 0.033). The correlation between the SC and the Tower of London resulted in a negative correlation coefficient due to the divergent direction of the two tested scores. In contrast, the only significant correlation between the total sum of words and the EF scores was found between the sum of words uttered in t2 and the Cued-Task-Switching (rsp=  0.161, p= 0.048).We suggest that the SC is more adequate at representing EF than the total number of generated words since we found more correlations for the SC and the EF. The results contradict the common practice of relying on the total sum of words in the VF task only.Previous studies have shown the involvement of cognitive flexibility in the switching VF task in healthy subjects [1]. Similar results were found for the Wisconsin-Card-Sorting and Trail-Making Test as measures of cognitive flexibility [2]. Our results support those findings by indicating that the switching component of the VF task may involve more than simple shifting abilities. Specifically, our results show that planning ability might be of importance for the successful performance of the task.References: 1.	De Paula JJ et al. Dement Neuropsychol. (2015) 3:258-264.2.	Van den Berg E et al. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. (2017) 44:35-44.
000862369 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572$$a572 - (Dys-)function and Plasticity (POF3-572)$$cPOF3-572$$fPOF III$$x0
000862369 536__ $$0G:(EU-Grant)604102$$aHBP - The Human Brain Project (604102)$$c604102$$fFP7-ICT-2013-FET-F$$x1
000862369 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)172024$$aCamilleri, Julia$$b1
000862369 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131644$$aHeim, Stefan$$b2
000862369 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aEickhoff, Simon$$b3
000862369 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)172811$$aWeis, Susanne$$b4
000862369 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/862369/files/presentation_JAmunts_Brixen-1.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000862369 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:862369$$pec_fundedresources$$pdriver$$pVDB$$popen_access$$popenaire
000862369 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)172863$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b0$$kFZJ
000862369 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)172024$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b1$$kFZJ
000862369 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131644$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000862369 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b3$$kFZJ
000862369 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)172811$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
000862369 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-570$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lDecoding the Human Brain$$v(Dys-)function and Plasticity$$x0
000862369 9141_ $$y2019
000862369 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000862369 920__ $$lyes
000862369 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406$$kINM-7$$lGehirn & Verhalten$$x0
000862369 980__ $$aconf
000862369 980__ $$aVDB
000862369 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000862369 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406
000862369 9801_ $$aFullTexts