Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Executive Function and the Frontal Lobes: A Meta-Analytic Review

  • Original Artical
  • Published:
Neuropsychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Currently, there is debate among scholars regarding how to operationalize and measure executive functions. These functions generally are referred to as “supervisory” cognitive processes because they involve higher level organization and execution of complex thoughts and behavior. Although conceptualizations vary regarding what mental processes actually constitute the “executive function” construct, there has been a historical linkage of these “higher-level” processes with the frontal lobes. In fact, many investigators have used the term “frontal functions” synonymously with “executive functions” despite evidence that contradicts this synonymous usage. The current review provides a critical analysis of lesion and neuroimaging studies using three popular executive function measures (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Phonemic Verbal Fluency, and Stroop Color Word Interference Test) in order to examine the validity of the executive function construct in terms of its relation to activation and damage to the frontal lobes. Empirical lesion data are examined via meta-analysis procedures along with formula derivatives. Results reveal mixed evidence that does not support a one-to-one relationship between executive functions and frontal lobe activity. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of construing the validity of these neuropsychological tests in anatomical, rather than cognitive and behavioral, terms.

This is a preview of subscription content,log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Ahola, K., Vilkki, J., and Servo, A. (1996). Frontal tests do not detect frontal infarctions after ruptured intracranial aneurysm.Brain and Cognition31: 1–16.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, S. W., Damasio, H., Jones, R. D., and Tranel, D. (1991). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance as a measure of frontal lobe damage.J. Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology13: 909–922.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, B. N., Goldman, R. S., Heaton, R. K., Curtiss, G., Thompson, L. T., Chelune, G. J., and Kay, G. G. (1996). Discriminability of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test using the standardization sample.J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsyc.18: 338–342.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, B. N., and Henry, R. R. (1992). Age-related performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting, Similarities, and Controlled Oral Word Association Tests.Clinical Neuropsychologist6: 16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology49A: 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldo, J. V., Shimamura, A. P., Delis, D. C., Kramer, J., and Kaplan, E. (2001). Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society7: 586–596.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Banich, M. T., Milham, M. P., Atchley, R., Cohen, N. J., Webb, A., Wszalek, T., Kramer, A. F., Liang, Z., Barad, V., Gullett, D., Shah, C., and Brown, C. (2000). Prefrontal regions play a predominant role in imposing an attentional ‘set’: Evidence from fMRI.Cognitive Brain Research10: 1–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barcelo, F. (2001). Does the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test measure prefrontal function?Spanish Journal of Psychology4: 79–100.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barcelo, F., and Knight, R. T. (2002). Both random and perseverative errors underlie WCST deficits in prefrontal patients.Neuropsychologia40: 349–356.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barcelo, F., Munoz-Cespedes, J. M., Pozo, M. A., and Rubia, F. J. (2000). Attentional set shifting modulates the target P3b response in the Wisconsin card sorting test.Neuropsychologia38: 1342–1355.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barcelo, F., and Rubia, F. J. (1998). Non-frontal P3b-like activity evoked by the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.Neuroreport9: 747–751.

    Article PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, R. A. (1996). Linkages between attention and executive functions. In: Lyon, G. R. and Krasnegor, N. A. (Eds.),Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 307–325). Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayless, J. D., Varney, N. R., and Roberts, R. J. (1989). Tinker Toy Test performance and vocational outcome in patients with closed-head injuries.J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsyc.11: 913–917.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., and Anderson, S. W. (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex.Cognition50: 7–15.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bench, C. J., Frith, C. D., Grasby, P. M., Friston, K. J., Paulesu, E., Frackowiak, R. S. J., and Dolan, R. J. (1993). Investigations of the functional anatomy of attention using the Stroop test.Neuropsychologia31: 907–922.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benton, A. L. (1968). Differential behavioral effects in frontal lobe disease.Neuropsychologia6: 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benton, A. L., and Hamsher, K. (1976).Multilingual aphasia examination. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, E. A. (1948). A simple objective technique for measuring flexibility in thinking.Journal of General Psychology39: 15–22.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, K. F., Ostrem, J. L., Randolph, C., Gold, J., Goldberg, T. E., Coppola, R., Carson, R. E., Herscovitch, P., and Weinberger, D. R. (1995). Physiological activation of a cortical network during performance of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: A positron emission tomography study.Neuropsychologia33: 1027–1046.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bigler, E. D. (1988). Frontal lobe damage and neuropsychological assessment.Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology3: 279–297.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blenner, J. L. (1993). The discriminant capacity of the Stroop test in tumor neurosurgical patients and its relationship to the visual evoked potential measure.Personality and Individual Differences15: 99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, D., and Benson, D. F. (1975). Personality changes with frontal and temporal lobe lesions. In: Benson, D. F. and Blumer, D. (Eds.),Psychiatric aspects of neurologic disease (pp. 151–170). New York: Grune and Stratton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, R. A. (1986). Contribution of various neuropsychological measures to detection of frontal lobe impairment.International Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology8: 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowden, S. C., Fowler, K. S., Bell, R. C., Whelan, G., Clifford, C. C., Ritter, A. J., and Long, C. M. (1998). The reliability and internal validity of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.Neuropsychological Rehabilitation8: 243–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. G., Kindermann, S. S., Siegle, G. J., Granholm, E., Wong, E. C., and Buxton, R. B. (1999). Brain activation and pupil response during covert performance of the Stroop Color Word task.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society5: 308–319.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, J., and Luszcz, M. A. (2000). Measurement of executive function: Consideration for detecting adult age differences.J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsyc.22: 40–55.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. W. (1997). Theory and methodology in executive function research. In: Rabbitt, P. (Ed.),Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 81–116). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. W. (2000). Strategy application disorder: The role of the frontal lobes in human multitasking.Psychological Research63: 279–288.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. W., Alderman, N., Ernslie, H., Evans, J., and Wilson, B. A. (1998). The ecological validity of tests of executive function.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society4: 547–558.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, G., Whalen, P. J., Rosen, B. R., Jenike, M. A., McInerney, S. C., and Rauch, S. L. (1998). The Counting Stroop: An interference task specialized for functional neuroimaging: Validation study with functional MRI.Human Brain Mapping6: 270–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, M., Retzlaff, P. D., and Vanderploeg, R. (1991). Neuropsychological test usage.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice22: 510–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R. W., Rorsman, I., Hill, J. M., and Tuma, R. (1993). The effects of frontal brain impairment on fluency: Simple and complex paradigms.Neuropsychology7: 519–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabeza, R., and Nyberg, L. (2000). Imaging cognition: An empirical review of PET studies with normal subjects.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience12: 1–47.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carlin, D., Bonerba, J., Phipps, M., Alexander, G., Shapiro, M., and Grafman, J. (2000). Planning impairments in frontal lobe dementia and frontal lobe lesion patients.Neuropsychologia38: 655–665.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. S., Mintun, M., and Cohen, J. D. (1995). Interference and facilitation effects during selective attention: an H215O PET study of Stroop task performance.Neuroimage2: 264–72.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Catefau, A. M., Parellada, E., Lomena, F., Bernardo, M., Setoain, J., Catarineu, S., Pavia, J., and Herranz, R. (1998). Role of the cingulate gyrus during the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: A single photon emission computed tomography study in normal volunteers.Psychiatry Research and Neuroimaging83: 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects.Mind11: 63–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Çiçek, M., and Nalçaci, E. (2001). Interhemispheric asymmetry of EEG alpha activity at rest and during the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: Relations with performance.Biological Psychology58: 75–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, J. (1995). Performance on the Tower of London test after severe head injury.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society1: 537–544.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer.Psychological Bulletin112: 155–159.

    CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., and McClelland, J. L. (1990). A parallel distributed processing model of the Stroop effect.Psychological Review97: 332–361.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H., and Hedges, L. V. (Eds.). (1994).The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, L. (1988). Clinical neuropsychology: Prospects and problems.Clinical Neuropsychologist2: 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cripe, L. I. (1996). The ecological validity of executive function testing. In: Sbordone, R. J. and Long, C. J. (Eds.),Ecological validity of neuropsychological testing (pp. 171–202). Delray Beach, FL: GR/St Lucie Press, Inc.

  • Crockett, D., Bilsker, D., Hurwitz, T., Kozak, J. (1986). Clinical utility of three measures of frontal lobe dysfunction in neuropsychiatric samples.International Journal of Neuroscience30: 241–248.

    Article PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. L. (1993). Frontal-subcortical circuits and human behavior.Archives of Neurology50: 873–880.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. L. (1995). Anatomic and behavioral aspects of frontal-subcortical circuits. In: Grafman, J., Holyoak, K. J. and Boller, F. (Eds.), Structure and functions of the human prefrontal cortex.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 769, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagher, A., Owen, A. M., Boecker, H., and Brooks, D. J. (2001). The role of the striatum and hippocampus in planning: A PET activation study in Parkinson's disease.Brain124: 1020–1032.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. R. (1994).Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and human brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Oliveira-Souza, R., Moll, J., Tovar Moll, F., and de Oliveira, D. L. G. (2001). Executive amnesia in a patient with pre-frontal damage due to a gunshot wound.Neurocase7: 383–389.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S. and Changeux, J. P. (1991). The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: theoretical analysis and modeling in a neuronal network.Cerebral Cortex 1: 62–79.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Demakis, G. J. (2003). A meta-analytic review of the sensitivity of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test to frontal and lateralized frontal brain damage.Neuropsychology17: 255–264.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Denckla, M. B. (1994). Measurement of executive function. In: Lyon, G. R. (Ed.),Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities: New views on measurement issues (pp. 117–142). Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denckla, M. B. (1996). A theory and model of executive function: A neuropsychological perspective. In: Lyon, G. R. and Krasnegor, N. A. (Eds.),Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 263–278). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drewe, E. A. (1974). The effect of type and area of brain lesion on Wisconsin Card Sorting Performance.Cortex10: 159–170.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, L. M., and Kaszniak, A. W. (2000). Executive functions in degenerative dementias: A comparative review.Neuropsychology Review10: 75–99.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, J. D., and Campbell, J. J. III. (2001). Regional prefrontal syndromes: A theoretical and clinical overview. In: Salloway, S. P., Malloy, P. F. and Duffy, J. D. (Eds.),The frontal lobes and neuropsychiatric illness (pp. 113–123). Washington, DC, US: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K., and Sussman, D. (1995). Toward a cognitive account of frontal lobe function: Simulating frontal lobe deficits in normal subjects. In: Grafman, J., Holyoak, K. J. and Boller, F. (Eds.),Structure and functions of the human prefrontal cortex. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 769, pp. 289–304). New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J., Burgess, P., and Emslie, H. (1995). Fluid intelligence after frontal lobe lesions.Neuropsychologia33: 261–268.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, J., Johnson, R., Swales, M., and Freer, C. (1997). Frontal lobe deficits after head injury: Unity and diversity of function.Cognitive Neuropsychology14: 713–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eslinger, P. J. (1996). Conceptualizing, describing, and measuring components of executive function: A summary. In: Lyon, G. R. and Krasnegor, N. A. (Eds.),Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 367–395). Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eslinger, P. J., and Damasio, A. R. (1985). Severe disturbance of higher cognition after bilateral frontal lobe ablation: Patient EVR.Neurology35: 1731–1741.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eslinger, P. J., and Grattan, L. M. (1993). Frontal lobe and frontal-striatal substrates for different forms of human cognitive flexibility.Neuropsychologia31: 17–28.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Espy, K. A., and Kaufmann, P. M. (2002). Individual differences in the development of executive function in children: Lessons from the delayed response and A-not-B tasks. In: Molfese, D. L. and Molfese, V. J. (Eds.),Developmental variations in learning: Applications to social, executive function, language, and reading skills (pp. 113–137). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettlinger, G., Teuber, H., and Milner, B. (1975). The seventeenth International Symposium of Neuropsychology.Neuropsychologia13: 125–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferstl, E. C., Guthke, T., and von Cramon, D. Y. (2002). Text comprehension after brain injury: Left prefrontal lesions affect inference processes.Neuropsychology16: 292–308.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, C. D., Friston, K. J., Herold, S., Silbersweig, D., Fletcher, P., Cahill, C., Dolan, R. J., Frackowiak, R. S., and Liddle, P. F. (1995). Regional brain activity in chronic schizophrenia patients during the performance of a verbal fluency task.British Journal of Psychiatry167: 343–349.

    Article PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, C. D., Friston, K., Liddle, P. F., and Fracknowiak, R. S. J. (1991). Willed action and the prefrontal cortex in man: A study with PET.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London244: 241–248.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research.Educational Researcher10: 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, K., and Scheerer, M. (1941). Abstract reasoning and concrete behavior: An experimental study with special tests.Psychological Monographs53: 1–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodglass, H., and Kaplan, E. (1979). Assessment of cognitive deficit in the brain-injured patient. In: Gazzaniga, M. S. (Ed.),Handbook of behavioral neurology (Vol. 2, pp. 3–22). NY: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafman, J., Jonas, B., and Salazar, A. (1990). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance based on location and size of neuroanatomical lesion in Vietnam veterans with penetrating head injury.Perceptual & Motor Skills71: 1120–1122.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grafman, J., and Litvan, I. (1999). Recognizing the importance of deficits in executive functions.Lancet354: 1921–1923.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grafman, J., Vance, S. C., Weingartner, H., Salazar, A. M., and Amin, D. (1986). The effects of lateralized frontal lesions on mood regulation.Brain109: 1127–1148.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, D. A., and Berg, E. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem.Journal of Experimental Psychology38: 404–411.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, K. W., Love, J. M., Sherwin, E., Mathias, C. W., Ramzinski, P., and Levy, J. (2002). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in chronic severe traumatic brain injury: Factor structure and performance subgroups.Brain Injury16: 29–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haines, J., Hoffman, W., Hanada, J., Brown, P., Labs, S., Loberg, D., Walter, C. T. (1994). Further evaluation of prefrontal lobe function data in schizophrenic patients during Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.American Journal of Psychiatry151: 1842–1843.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, R. K. (1981).Wisconsin Card Sorting Test Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, R. K., Chelune, G. J., Talley, J. L., Kay, G. G., and Curtiss, G. (1993).Wisconsin Card Sorting Test Manual: Revised and Expanded. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hebb, D. O. (1949).The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heck, E. T., and Bryer, J. B. (1986). Superior sorting and categorizing ability in a case of bilateral frontal atrophy: An exception to the rule.Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology8: 313–316.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V. (1994). Fixed effects models. In: Cooper, H. and Hedges, L. V. (Eds.),The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 285–299). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., and Olkin, I. (1985).Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, J. D., and Crawford, J. R. (2004).A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency performance following focal cortical lesions.Neuropsychology18: 284–295.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holst, P., and Vilkki, J. (1988). Effect of frontomedial lesions on performance on the Stroop Test and word fluency tasks.J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsyc.10: 79–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humes, G. E., Welsh, M. C., Retzlaff, P., and Cookson, N. (1997). Towers of Hanoi and London: Reliability of two executive function tasks.Assessment4: 249–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890).The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janowsky, J. S., Shimamura, A. P., Kritchevsky, M., and Squire, L. R. (1989). Cognitive impairment following frontal lobe damage and its relevance to human amnesia.Behavioral Neuroscience103: 548–560.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. T. (1989).DSTAT: Software for the meta-analytic review of research literatures (Version 1.00) [Computer software]. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

  • Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., Koeppe, R. A., Awh, E., Minoshima, S., and Mintun, M. A. (1993). Spatial working memory in humans as revealed by PET.Nature363: 623–625.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kafer, K. L., and Hunter, M. (1997). On testing the face validity of planning/problem-solving tasks in a normal population.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society3: 108–119.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kawasaki, Y., Maeda, Y., Suzuki, M., Urata, K., Higashima, M., Kiba, K., Yamaguchi, N., Matsuda, H., and Hisada, K. (1993). SPECT analysis of regional cerebral blood flow changes in patients with schizophrenia during the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.Schizophrenia Research10: 109–116.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Konishi, S., Kawazu, M., Uchida, I., Kikyo, H., Asakura, I., and Miyashita, Y. (1999). Contribution of working memory to transient activation in human inferior prefrontal cortex during performance of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.Cerebral Cortex9: 745–753.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Konishi, S., Nakajima, K., Uchida, I., Kameyama, M., Nakahara, K., Sekihara, K., and Miyashita, Y. (1998). Transient activation of inferior prefrontal cortex during cognitive set shifting.Nature Neuroscience1: 80–84.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, H., Skudlarski, P., Gatenby, J. C., Peterson, B. S., and Gore, J. C. (2000). An event-related functional MRI study of the Stroop color word interference task.Cerebral Cortex10: 552–560.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, H. S., Song, J., Scheibel, R. S., Fletcher, J. M., Harward, H., Lilly, M., and Goldstein, F. (1997). Concept formation and problem-solving following closed head injury in children.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society3: 598–607.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, D. S., and Prueitt, P. S. (1989). Modeling some effects of frontal lobe damage: Novelty and perseveration.Neural Networks2: 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lezak, M. D. (1995).Neuropsychological assessment (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, D. M., and Hartley, A. A. (2000). Further evidence that negative priming in the Stroop color-word task is equivalent in older and younger adults.Psychology andAging15: 9–17.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luria, A. R. (1966).Higher cortical functions in man. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, G. R., and Krasnegor, N. A. (Eds.). (1996).Attention, memory, and executive function. Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin109: 163–203.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Malloy, P. F., and Richardson, E. D. (2001). Assessment of frontal lobe functions. In: Salloway, S. P., Malloy, P. F., and Duffy, J. D. (Eds.),The frontal lobes and neuropsychiatric illness (pp. 125–137). Washington, DC, US: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manes, F., Sahakian, B., Clark, L., Rogers, R., Antoun, N., Aitken, M., and Robbins, T. (2002). Decision-making processes following damage to the prefrontal cortex.Brain125: 624–639.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manly, T., and Robertson, I. H. (1997). Sustained attention and the frontal lobes. In: Rabbitt, P. (Ed.),Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 135–153). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marenco, S., Coppola, R., Daniel, D. G., Zigun, J. R., and Weinberger, D. R. (1993). Regional cerebral blood flow during the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in normal subjects studied by xenon-133 dynamic SPECT: Comparison of absolute values, percent distribution values, and covariance analysis.Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging50: 177–192.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mentzel, H. J., Gaser, C., Volz, H. P., Rzanny, R., Hager, F., Sauer, H., and Kaiser, W. A. (1998). Cognitive stimulation with the Wisconsin Card Sorting Tests: Functional MR imaging at 1.5 T.Radiology207: 399–404.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, G., Caltagirone, C., Gainotti, G., Masullo, C., and Silveri, M. C. (1981). Neuropsychological correlates of localized cerebral lesions in non-aphasic brain-damaged patients.Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology3: 53–63.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, E. (1984). Verbal fluency as a function of a measure of verbal intelligence and in relation to different types of cerebral pathology.British Journal of Clinical Psychology23: 53–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, B. (1963). Effects of different brain lesions on card sorting: The role of the frontal lobes.Archives of Neurology9: 100–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, B. (1964). Some effects of frontal lobectomy in man. In: Warren, J. M. and Akert, K. (Eds.),The frontal granular cortex and behavior (pp. 313–335). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, B. (1971). Interhemispheric differences in the localization of psychological processes in man.British Medical Bulletin27: 272–277.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., and Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis.Cognitive Psychology41: 49–100.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, A. B., and Lilienfeld, S. O. (2000). A meta-analytic review of the relation between antisocial behavior and neuropsychological measures of executive function.Clinical Psychology Review20: 113–136.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mountain, M. A., and Snow, W. G. (1993). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test as a measure of frontal pathology: A review.Clinical Neuropsychologist7: 108–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, B. (1989).Advanced BASIC meta-analysis. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagahama, Y., Fukuyama, H., Yamaguchi, H., Katsumi, Y., Magata, Y., Shibasaki, H., and Kimura, J. (1997). Age-related changes in cerebral blood flow activation during performance of a card sorting test.Experimental Brain Research114: 571–577.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nagahama, Y., Fukuyama, H., Yamauchi, H., Matsuzaki, S., Konishi, J., Shibasaki, H., and Kimura, J. (1996). Cerebral activation during performance of a card sorting test.Brain119: 1667–1675.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nagahama, Y., Sadato, N., Yamauchi, H., Katsumi, Y., Hayashi, T., Fukuyama, H., Kimura, J., Shibasaki, H., and Yonekura, Y. (1998). Neural activity during attention shifts between object features.Neuroreport: an International Journal for the Rapid Communication of Research in Neuroscience9: 2633–2638.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, H. E. (1976). A modified card sorting test sensitive to frontal lobe defects.Cortex12: 313–324.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenstein, M. R., Aleman, A., and de Haan, E. H. F. (2001). Relationship between symptom dimensions and neurocognitive functioning in schizophrenia: A meta-analysis of WCST and CPT studies.Journal of Psychiatric Research35: 119–125.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Orwin, R. G. (1983). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis.Journal of Educational Statistics8: 157–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, A. M., Sahakian, B. J., Hodges, J. R., Summers, B. A., Polkey, C. E., Robbins, T. W. (1995). Dopamine-dependent frontostriatal planning deficits in early Parkinson's disease.Neuropsychology9: 126–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pardo, J. V., Pardo, P. J., Janer, K. W., and Raichle, M. E. (1990). The anterior cingulate cortex mediates processing selection in the Stroop attentional conflict paradigm.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences87: 256–259.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parellada, E., Catafau, A. M., Bernardo, M., Lomena, F., Catarineu, S., and Gonzalez-Monclus, E. (1998). The resting and activation issue of hypofrontality: A single photon emission computed tomography study in neuroleptic-naive and neuroleptic-free schizophrenic female patients.Biological Psychiatry44: 787–790.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parks, R. W., Levine, D. S., Long, D. L., Crockett, D. J., Dalton, I. E., Weingartner, H., Fedio, P., Coburn, K. L., Siler, G., Matthews, J. R., and Becker, R. E. (1992). Parallel distributed processing and neuropsychology: A neural network model of Wisconsin Card Sorting and verbal fluency.Neuropsychology Review3: 213–233.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parks, R. W., Loewenstein, D. A., Dodrill, K. L., Barker, W. W., Yoshii, F., Chang, J. Y., Emran, A., Apicella, A., Sheramata, W. A., and Duara, R. (1988). Cerebral metabolic effects of a verbal fluency test: A PET scan study.Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology10: 565–575.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paulesu, E., Goldacre, B., Scifo, P., Cappa, S. F., Gilardi, M. C., Castiglioni, I., Perani, D., and Fazio, F. (1997). Functional heterogeneity of the left inferior frontal cortex as revealed by fMRI.Neuroreport8: 2011–2017.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pendleton, M. G., Heaton, R. K., Lehman, R. A., and Hulihan, D. M. (1982). Diagnostic utility of the Thurstone Word Fluency Test in neuropsychological evaluations.Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology4: 307–317.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, B. F., Bennetto, L., McAleer, O., and Roberts, R. J. (1996). Executive functions and working memory: Theoretical and measurement issues. In: Lyon, G. R. and Krasnegor, N. A. (Eds.),Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 327–348). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perret, E. (1974). The left frontal lobe of man and the suppression of habitual responses in verbal categorical behavior.Neuropsychologia12: 323–330.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, W., Potterat, E. G., and Braff, D. L. (2001). Self-monitoring enhances Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in patients with schizophrenia: Performance is improved by simply asking patients to verbalize their sorting strategy.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society7: 344–352.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, B. S., Skudlarski, P., Gatenby, J. C., Zhang, H., Anderson, A. W., and Gore, J. C. (1999). An fMRI study of Stroop Word-Color Interference: Evidence for cingulate subregions subserving multiple distributed attentional systems.Biological Psychiatry45: 1237–1258.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, E. A., Hyder, F., Blamire, A. M., and Shulman, R. G. (1997). FMRI of the prefrontal cortex during overt verbal fluency.Neuroreport8: 561–565.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, L. H. (1997). Do “frontal tests” measure executive function? Issues of assessment and evidence from fluency tests. In: Rabbitt, P. (Ed.),Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 191–213). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podell, K., Lovell, M., Zimmerman, M., and Goldberg, E. (1995). The cognitive bias task and lateralized frontal lobe functions in males.Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences7: 491–501.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., and Dehaene, S. (1994). Attentional networks.Trends in Neuroscience17: 75–79.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., and Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain.Annual Review of Neuroscience13: 25–42.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., and Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In: Solso, R. L. (Ed.),Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quantz, J. O. (1897). Problems in the psychology of reading.Psychological Review Monographs2: (No. 5).

  • Rabbitt, P. (1997). Introduction: Methodologies and models in the study of executive function. In: Rabbitt, P. (Ed.),Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 1–38). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragland, J. D., Gur, R. C., Glahn, D. C., Censits, D. M., Smith, R. J., Lazarev, M. G., Alavi, A., and Gur, R. E. (1998). Frontotemporal cerebral blood flow change during executive and declarative memory tasks in schizophrenia: A positron emission tomography study.Neuropsychology12: 399–413.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramier, A. M., and Hécaen, H. (1970). Rôle respectif des atteintes frontales et de la latéralisation lésionnelle dans les déficits de la “fluence verbale.”Revue Neurologique123: 17–22.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ready, R. E., Stierman, L., and Paulsen, J. S. (2001). Ecological validity of neuropsychological and personality measures of executive functions.Clinical Neuropsychologist15: 314–323.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reitan, R. M., and Wolfson, D. (1994). A selective and critical review of neuropsychological deficits and the frontal lobes.Neuropsychology Review4: 161–197.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rezai, K., Andreasen, N. C., Alliger, R., Cohen, G., Swayze, V., and O’Leary, D. S. (1993). The neuropsychology of the prefrontal cortex.Archives of Neurology50: 636–642.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M. G. (2004).Age-related differences in performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: A meta-analytic review.Psychology and Aging19: 482–494.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riehemann, S., Volz, H., Stuetzer, P., Smesny, S., Gaser, C., and Sauer, H. (2001). Hypofrontality in neuroleptic-naive schizophrenic patients during the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test-A fMRI study.European Archives of Psychiatry & Clinical Neuroscience251: 66–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, T. W. (1998). Dissociating executive functions of the prefrontal cortex. In: Roberts, A. C., Robbins, T. W. and Weiskrantz, L. (Eds.),The prefrontal cortex: Executive and cognitive functions (pp. 117–130). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, A. L., Heaton, R. K., Lehman, R. A. W., and Stilson, D. W. (1980). The utility of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in detecting and localizing frontal lobe lesions.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology48: 605–614.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1991).Meta-analytic procedures for social research (rev. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sbordone, R. J. (1996). Ecological validity: Some critical issues for the neuropsychologist. In: Sbordone, R. J. and Long, C. J. (Eds.),Ecological validity of neuropsychological testing (pp. 15–41). Delray Beach, FL: GR/St Lucie Press, Inc.

  • Sbordone, R. J. (2000). The executive functions of the brain. In: Groth-Marnat, G. (Ed.),Neuropsychological assessment in clinical practice: A guide to test interpretation and integration (pp. 437–456). New York, NY, US: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, F. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology.American Psychologist,47: 1173–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnirman, G. M., Welsh, M. C., and Retzlaff, P. D. (1998). Development of the Tower of London–Revised.Assessment5: 355–360.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzer, R. (1989).Meta-analysis programs (Version 5.3) [Computer software]. Berlin: Author.

  • Sergeant, J. A., Geurts, H., and Oosterlaan, J. (2002). How specific is a deficit of executive functioning for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder?Behavioural Brain Research130: 3–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T. (1988).From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T., and Burgess, P. (1991a). Higher-order cognitive impairments and frontal lobe lesions in man. In: Levin, H. S., Eisenberg, H. M. and Benton, A. L. (Eds.),Frontal lobe function and dysfunction (pp. 125–138). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T., and Burgess, P. (1991b). Deficits in strategy application following frontal lobe damage in man.Brain114: 727–741.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T., and Evans, M. E. (1978). The involvement of the frontal lobes in cognitive estimation.Cortex14: 294–303.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spreen, O., and Strauss, E. (1998).A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms, and commentary (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology18: 643–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., and Alexander, M. P. (2000). Executive functions and the frontal lobes: A conceptual view.Psychological Research63: 289–298.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Alexander, M. P., Hamer, L., Palumbo, C., Dempster, R., Binns, M., Levine, B., and Izukawa, D. (1998). The effects of focal anterior and posterior brain lesions on verbal fluency.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society4: 265–278.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., and Benson, D. F. (1984). Neuropsychological studies of the frontal lobes.Psychological Bulletin95: 3–28.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., and Benson, D. F. (1986).The frontal lobes. NY: Raven Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Benson, D. F., Kaplan, E. F., Weir, W. S., and Della Malva, C. (1981). Leucotomized and nonleucotomized schizophrenics: Comparison on tests of attention.Biological Psychiatry16: 1085–1100.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Benson, D. F., Kaplan, E. F., Weir, W. S., Naeser, M. A., Lieberman, I., and Ferrill, D. (1983). The involvement of orbitofrontal cerebrum in cognitive tasks.Neuropsychologia21: 235–248.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Floden, D., Alexander, M. P., Levine, B., and Katz, D. (2001). Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: Dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location.Neuropsychologia39: 771–786.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., and Levine, B. (2002). Adult clinical neuropsychology: Lessons from studies of the frontal lobes.Annual Review of Psychology53: 401–433.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Levine, B., Alexander, M. P., Hong, J., Palumbo, C., Hamer, L., Murphy, K. J., and Isukawa, D. (2000). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in patients with focal frontal and posterior brain damage: Effects of lesion location and test structure on separable cognitive processes.Neuropsychologia38: 388–402.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stuss, D. T., Shallice, T., Alexander, M. P., and Picton, T. W. (1995). A multidisciplinary approach to anterior attentional functions.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences769: 191–211.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. F., Kornblum, S., Lauber, E. J., Minoshima, S., and Koeppe, R. A. (1997). Isolation of specific interference processing in the Stroop task: PET activation studies.Neuroimage6: 81–92.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Teuber, H. L., Battersby, W. S., and Bender, M. B. (1951). Performance of complex visual tasks after cerebral lesions.Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease114: 413–429.

    Article PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1938).Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien, A. Y., Schlaepfer, T. E., Orr, W., and Pearlson, G. D. (1998). SPECT brain blood flow changes with continuous ligand infusion during previously learned WCST performance.Psychiatry Research and Neuroimaging82: 47–52.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tranel, D., Anderson, S. W., and Benton, A. (1994). Development of the concept of “executive function” and its relationship to the frontal lobes. In: Boller, F. and Grafman, J. (Eds.),Handbook of Neuropsychology (Vol. 9, pp. 125–148). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troyer, A. K., Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., Alexander, M. P., and Stuss, D. (1998). Clustering and switching on verbal fluency: The effects of focal frontal- and temporal-lobe lesions.Neuropsychologia36: 499–504.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, M. D., Bradshaw, C. M., and Szabadi, E. (1993). Utility of the Modified Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in neuropsychological assessment.British Journal of Clinical Psychology32: 333–343.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandierendonck, A. (2000). Executive functions and task switching.Psychologica Belgica40: 211–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendrell, P., Junque, C., Pujol, J., Jurado, M. A., Molet, J., and Grafman, J. (1995). The role of prefrontal regions in the Stroop task.Neuropsychologia33: 341–352.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vigotsky, L. (1934). Thought in schizophrenia.Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry31: 1063–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volz, H., Gaser, C., Häger, F., Rzanny, R., Mentzel, H., Kreitschmann-Andermahr, I., Kaiser, W. A., and Sauer, H. (1997). Brain activation during cognitive stimulation with the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test–A functional MRI study on healthy volunteers and schizophrenics.Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging75: 145–157.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wallesch, C. W., Kornhuber, H. H., Kunz, T., and Brunner, R. J. (1983). Neuropsychological deficits associated with small unilateral thalamic lesions.Brain106: 141–152.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L. (1987). Concept formation and frontal lobe function: The search for a clinical frontal lobe test. In: Perecman, E. (Ed.),The frontal lobes revisited (pp. 189–205). New York: IRBN Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warbuton, E., Wise, R. J. S., Price, C. J., Weiller, C., Hadar, U., Ramsay, S., and Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1996). Noun and verb retrieval by normal subjects: Studies with PET.Brain119: 159–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warkentin, S., and Passant, U. (1997). Functional imaging of the frontal lobes in organic dementia.Dementia & Geriatric Cognitive Disorders8: 105–109.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weigl, E. (1941). On the psychology of so-called processes of abstraction.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology36: 3–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, D. R., Berman, K. F., and Zec, R. F. (1986). Physiological dysfunction of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in schizophrenia: I. Regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) evidence.Archives of General Psychiatry43: 114–124.

    PubMed CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, M. C. (2002). Developmental and clinical variations in executive functions. In: Molfese, D. L. and Molfese, V. J. (Eds.),Developmental variations in learning: Applications to social, executive function, language, and reading skills (pp. 139–185). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, M. C., Satterlee-Cartmell, T., and Stine, M. (1999). Towers of Hanoi and London: Contribution of working memory and inhibition to performance.Brain & Cognition41: 231–242.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. A. (1993). Ecological validity of neuropsychological assessment: Do neuropsychological indexes predict performance in everyday activities?Applied & Preventive Psychology2: 209–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zable, M., and Harlow, H. F. (1946). The performance of rhesus monkeys on a series of object quality and positional discriminations and discrimination reversals.Journal of Comparative Psychology39: 13–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zangwill, O. L. (1966). Psychological deficits associated with frontal-lobe lesions.International Journal of Neurology5: 395–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelazo, P. D., Carter, A., Reznick, J. S., and Frye, D. (1997). Early development of executive function: A problem-solving framework.Review of General Psychology1: 198–226.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Preparation of this research was supported in part by Grant # RO1 MH64732 from the National Institutes of Mental Health to the second author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA

    Julie A. Alvarez

  2. Center for Prenatal Assessment and Human Development, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Eugene Emory

Authors
  1. Julie A. Alvarez

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eugene Emory

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Appendices

APPENDIX A

Formulas and Procedures for Primary Meta- Analysis

Preliminary Issues

All computations described below were carried out using the following three computer programs – DSTAT (Johnson,1989), Meta-Analysis Programs (Schwarzer,1989), and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) – and by hand using formulas cited in Cooper and Hedges (1994), Hedges and Olkin (1985), Orwin (1983), and Rosenthal (1991).

Calculation of Effect Sizes

The unbiased estimatord was chosen as the effect size estimator for the meta-analysis in this paper. Although there are a variety of effect size indicators from which to choose (Glass,1976; Rosenthal,1991), the decision to used was based on theoretical and practical matters. First,d was selected because the data to be examined were represented as differences between groups (usually means and standard deviations). Estimators in thed family are better suited than estimators in ther family for studying the strength and direction of mean differences between groups (Hedges and Olkin,1985). Second, the unbiased estimatord adjusts for bias, that is, it adjusts each effect size to control for a standard discrepancy between the sample effect size and the population effect size (Hedges and Olkin,1985). Third, with respect to more practical concerns, the majority of studies reported means and standard deviations, which reduced the need to transform original findings to another effect size index such asr. Lastly, for the present review, negative effect sizes indicate that persons with frontal damage performed worse than the control group (i.e., either healthy controls or persons with non-frontal damage). For instance, a negative effect size on the COWA indicates that the frontal group produced fewer words than the control group. For those samples in which a lower score reflected better performance (e.g., fewer perseverative errors on the WCST), the sign of the effect size was reversed.

When means and standard deviations were available, the following formula was used to calculated (Rosenthal,1991):

$$ d = M_1 - M_2 /\sigma _{{\rm pooled}} $$
(A.1)

whereM1 andM2 are means for groups one and two, respectively, and, σpooled (the pooled within-group standard deviation) was computed as follows:

$$ \sigma _{{\rm pooled}} = \sqrt {\frac{{N_1 SD_1^2 + N_2 SD_2^2 }}{{N_1 + N_2 - 2}} + \left( {\frac{1}{{N_1 }} + \frac{1}{{N_2 }}} \right)} $$
(A.2)

When means and standard deviations were not available,t-values,F-values, orp-values were used to calculated using DSTAT (Johnson,1989) or Meta-Analysis Programs (Schwarzer,1989).

Nonindependence

Several studies in this analysis employed more than one EF measure (e.g., WCSTand verbal fluency). In addition, the same researcher or team of researchers often conducted more than one study examining the relationship between EF measures and the frontal lobes. While including these studies would violate the assumption of independent samples (Hedges and Olkin,1985), excluding them would result in too few studies to conduct a meta-analysis with adequate statistical power. Thus, four possible approaches to dealing with this problem (Mullen,1989) were considered: (a) use each effect size as if it came from an independent sample; (b) use the results from the best EF measure; (c) conduct individual meta-analyses for each EF measure; or (d) average the effect sizes of the different EF measures within each study to form one estimate. The last three approaches were discarded for the following three reasons, respectively: (a) there are no criteria available for determining which EF measure is the “best;” (b) there are too few studies to conduct individual meta-analyses for each EF measure; and (c) averaging the effect sizes of the different EF measures within each study would lose information about the uniqueness of each measure and its possible moderating effect on the relationship between EFs and the frontal lobes. Thus, the first approach was chosen (i.e., each effect size was treated as if it came from an independent sample).

Combining Effect Sizes

The individual effect sizes from the 27 studies listed in Table 8 were averaged to form an unweighted grand mean estimate of the relationship between frontal lobe lesions and performance on the WCST, phonemic verbal fluency, and the Stroop test using the following formula:

$$ \overline d = \frac{{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {d_i } }}{k} $$
(A.3)
Table 8. Lesion Studies Included in Meta-Analysis

wherek is the number of effect sizes combined anddi is the aggregated effect size from the ith study.

Next, effect sizes were combined after weighting each effect size by its sample size:

$$ d_ + = \frac{{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {\frac{{d_i }}{{\frown^\sigma}^2 d_i }} }} {{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {\frac{1}{{\frown^\sigma}^2 d_i }}}} $$
(A.4)

where the variance ofd is defined as:

$$ \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\frown$}}\over \sigma } ^2 _{d_i } = \frac{{n_F + n_C }}{{n_F n_C }} + \frac{{d_i^2 }}{{2\left( {n_F + n_C } \right)}} $$
(A.5)

where nF is the sample size for the focal group and nC is the sample size for the control group. Weighting the studies by sample size allowed more emphasis to be placed on studies with larger samples, thereby producing more precise effect size estimates (Hedges and Olkin,1985).

For purposes of interpretation, the strength of obtained effect sizes was evaluated according to criteria outlined in Cohen (1992), that is, ad of .20 indicates a small effect, .50 indicates a moderate effect, and .80 indicates a large effect.

Tests of Homogeneity of Effect Sizes

TheQ statistic outlined in formula 6 indicates whether the amount of variance in the 27 studies used to obtain an estimate of the population effect is greater than what would be expected based upon sampling error alone (Hedges and Olkin,1985).

$$ Q = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {\frac{{d_i ^2 }}{{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\frown$}}\over \sigma } ^2 d_i }}} - \frac{{\left( {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {\frac{{d_i ^2 }}{{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\frown$}}\over \sigma } ^2 d_i }}} } \right)^2 }}{{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^k {\frac{1}{{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\frown$}}\over \sigma } ^2 d_i }}} }} $$
(A.6)

Estimation of the “Fail-safe N”

There is a risk that the studies sampled for this meta-analysis only comprise a subset of the existing research on EF measures and frontal lobe functioning due to the problem that journals often accept for publication only those studies with “significant” results. Although there were studies included in this meta-analysis that did not find significant differences between groups, the 27 studies in this quantitative review may not adequately represent the entire population of studies on this topic. Thus, a “fail-safeN” statistic was computed as an estimate of the number of additional studies with null results (i.e., effect sizes equal to zero) that would be needed to reduce the weighted combined mean effect size to non-significance (Orwin,1983). A fail-safeN was calculated using the following formula:

$$ N_{{\rm fail - safe}} = \frac{{N_{{\rm total}} \left( {d_ + - d_{{\rm crit}} } \right)}}{{d_{{\rm crit}} }}$$
(A.7)

whereNtotal is the number of effect sizes included in the meta-analysis,dcrit is the critical value ofd, and d+ is the weighted mean effect size.

APPENDIX B

Formulas and Procedures for Moderator Analyses

Preliminary Issues

All computations described below were carried out using the following three computer programs – DSTAT (Johnson,1989), Meta-Analysis Programs (Schwarzer,1989), and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) – and by hand using formulas cited in Cooper and Hedges (1994).

Examination of Moderator Variables

Analyses of potential moderator variables were conducted by means of fixed effects strategies based on whether the variables of interest were categorical or continuous (Hedges,1994). For categorical moderators (i.e., type of test and comparison group), estimates of both between (Qb) and within (Qw) group variances were derived and tested along theχ2 distribution to determine whether they were statistically significant moderators. A significantQb indicates that there is significant variability between the groups that comprise the categorical moderator variable that is greater than what would be expected simply by chance. On the other hand, a significantQw indicates that there is still significant variability within each effect size that is not being explained by the categorical moderator. Thus, a categorical moderator variable explains all of the heterogeneity present in the grand mean effect size only when the variance is significant between groups (and is not significant within groups). Similar to the analysis of variance (ANOVA), theQb statistic provides an omnibus test for between-group differences. Follow-up contrasts should be conducted whenQb is significant and there are three or more levels of the moderator variable. [Note that only “type of test” had three levels (i.e., WCST, verbal fluency, and Stroop). A significantQw was obtained along with a significantQb for this moderator variable and, thus, a contrast analysis was conducted accordingly.]

The following computational formulas, which weight effect sizes by sample size, were used for the two categorical moderator analyses (Hedges,1994):

$$ TW = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^j {(n_i - 3} ) $$
(B.8)
$$ TWD = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^j {(n_i - 3} )d_i $$
(B.9)
$$ TWDS = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^j {(n_i - 3)d_i ^2 } $$
(B.10)
$$ Q_{{\rm Total}} = {\rm TWDS} - \frac{{({\rm TWD})^2 }}{{TW}}$$
(B.11)
$$ Q_{wi} = {\rm TWDS}_i - \frac{{{\rm TWD}_i ^2 }}{{{\rm TW}_i }} $$
(B.12)
$$Q_b = Q_T - Q_w$$
(B.13)

[For formulas 8–10,j = total number of cases in each sub-group.]

Weighted least squares regression procedures (WLS) were used to test the continuous moderator, age (Hedges,1994). Effect sizes were weighted by their sample size and then regressed onto the relevant predictor variable (i.e., age). AZ-test of the unstandardized regression coefficient (b) was used to determine the statistical significance (i.e., whetherb differed significantly from zero) of the moderator using formulas 14–16; 95% confidence intervals were constructed according to formula 16:

$$Z_j = \frac{{b_j }}{{S_j }}$$
(B.14)
$$S_j = \frac{{SE_j }}{{\sqrt {MS_{{\rm error}} } }}$$
(B.15)
$$b_j \pm 1.96(S_j )$$
(B.16)

j = 1, …,k;k = total # of predictors in equation.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Advertisement

[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2025 Movatter.jp