![]() ![]() 18, 19) The χ 2 test was utilized to assess the fit of hypothetical models to the sample data. Various indices were used to evaluate model fit. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) tested whether psychometric tasks developed to measure WM fit better to OFM or TFM in a mixed clinical sample. ![]() The estimates of parameters were obtained using maximum likelihood methods. Statistical AnalysisĮxpectation-maximization algorithm 17) was conducted to replace missing data. Spatial addition is required to maintain and manipulate spatial information, while symbol span is required to maintain and manipulate visual details. WM subtests of Korean version of WMS-IV (K-WMS-IV) 16) were administered to assess visual WM. Each sub-scores of digit span test (forward, backward, and sequential) was coded separately for statistical analysis. WM subtests of Korean version of WAIS-IV (K-WAIS-IV) 15) were administered to assess auditory WM: digit span and letter number sequencing (LNS). Written patient consent and research approval by Hallym University Sacred Heat Hospital institutional review board were obtained (IRB No. Patients’ demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. Patients with physical disabilities or other severe medical conditions were excluded from the study, ultimately resulting in a total of 115 participants. A structured diagnostic interview, MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus 5.0 (MINI-Plus 5.0), 13, 14) and psychological tests were conducted by clinical psychology trainees under the supervision of a licensed clinical psychologist. Patients were diagnosed by psychiatrists based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition (DSM-IV) 12) diagnostic criteria. Participants were psychiatric out- and in-patients aged 19 to 60 years who visited Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital from November 2015 through October 2016. We predicted that WM has modality distinctive constructs (i.g., possible TFM). Therefore, our study is intended to investigate which of one or two factor model (OFM TFM) fits better with WM test data from the newest versions of Wechsler Scales in a heterogeneous psychiatric sample. 11) Regardless, investigation is required to identify whether it is sufficient to only administer WM measures of a single modality. Routinely measuring both forms of WM is not recommended since they are strongly inter-correlated and functionally similar. Auditory and visual WM tests were included separately in Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV (WAIS-IV) 9) and Wechsler Memory Scale-IV (WMS-IV) 10). Furthermore, recent versions of Wechsler Scales 9, 10) have placed greater emphasis on WM components than their predecessors. Clinicians frequently use psychometric tools such as WM subtests of Wechsler Intelligence or Memory Scales to measure WM capacity. In general, WM tests require the subjects to manipulate the given auditory or visual information all the while maintaining them. However, the subsystems are not perfectly independent and are controlled by the central executive, a domain-general system. Each subsystem has separate and independent capacity-limited storage for temporal retention of verbal or visual-spatial information. Domain-specific systems were divided into phonological loop and visual-spatial sketchpad according to modalities of information and thus is often called as modality-specific systems. WM model proposed by Baddeley 6– 8) is one of the most influential WM models and consists of two domain-specific systems and a domain-general system. Deficits in WM are reported in many psychiatric diseases as WM is deeply related to clinical symptoms, other complex cognitive functions, and activities of daily living. 1) From a clinical perspective, WM is fairly important. Working memory (WM) is a cognitive system that allows for transient storage and manipulation of given information. Keywords: Modality-specific working memory, WAIS-IV, WMS-IV Our study supports a modality model of WM, or the existence of modality-specific WM systems, and thus poses a clinical significance of assessing both auditory and visual WM tests. ResultsĬFA results demonstrated that a two factor model fits the data better than one-factor model as expected. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to observe whether WM measures fit better to a one-factor or two-factor model. WM subtests of Korean version of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV and Korean version of Wechsler Memory Scale-IV were administered to assess WM. MethodsĪ total of 115 patients were diagnosed on the basis of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria and with MINI-Plus 5.0, a structured diagnostic interview. To do this, we administered the most recent and universal clinical WM measures in a mixed psychiatric sample. This study was to identify whether working memory (WM) can be clearly subdivided according to auditory and visual modality.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |