Research Byte: Motor cortex excitability in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A systematic review and meta-analysis via BrowZine

Motor cortex excitability in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A systematic review and meta-analysis
Dutra, T.G.; Baltar, A.; Monte-Silva, K.K.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, Vol. 56 – 2016: 1 - 9

10.1016/j.ridd.2016.01.022

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422216300300

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422216300300

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Research Byte: The Human Brainnetome Atlas: A New Brain Atlas Based on Connectional Architecture.

The Human Brainnetome Atlas: A New Brain Atlas Based on Connectional Architecture.

2016 May 26. pii: bhw157. [Epub ahead of print] 1Brainnetome Center. • 2Brainnetome Center National Laboratory of…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

$1.2 Billion Human Brain Project That Blows Your Mind

$1.2 Billion Human Brain Project That Blows Your Mind

As a society living in a 21st century, we have just begun to realize how little do we know about our brain. We desperately need to understand how…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on scitechconnect.elsevier.com

Research Byte: Short-term memory for faces is related to general intelligence: A possible new CHC narrow ability taxonomy candidate?

Click on image to enlarge.

Intelligence

Available online 21 May 2016

In Press, Corrected Proof — Note to users

Short-term memory for faces relates to general intelligence moderately ^☆

• Gilles E. Gignac^, ,
• Mahesh Shankaralingam,
• Kipling Walker,
• Philippe Kilpatrick

 Show more

doi:10.1016/j.intell.2016.05.001

Get rights and content

---

Highlights

•

Short-term memory for faces correlated positively with several stratum II factors.

•

Short-term memory for faces was associated with general intelligence at .34.

•

Short-term memory for faces should not be considered “special” (i.e., independent of g).

•

Prosopagnosia may be best characterised as a learning disability.

---

Abstract

The results associated with a small number of investigations suggest that individual differences in memory for faces, as measured by the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT), are independent of intelligence. Consequently, memory for faces has been suggested to be a special construct, unlike other cognitive abilities. However, previous investigations have measured intelligence with only one or two subtests. Additionally, the sample sizes upon which previous investigations were based were relatively small (N = 45 to 80). Consequently, in this investigation, a battery of eight cognitive ability tests and the CFMT were administered to a relatively large number of participants (N = 211). Based on a correlated-factor model, memory for faces was found to be correlated positively with fluid intelligence (.29), short-term memory (.23) and lexical knowledge ability (.19). Additionally, based on a higher-order model, memory for faces was found to be associated with g at .34. The results are interpreted to suggest that memory for faces, as measured by the CFMT, may be characterised as a relatively typical narrow cognitive ability within the Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence, rather than a special ability (i.e., independent of other abilities). Future research with a greater diversity in the measurement of face recognition ability is encouraged (e.g., long-term memory), as the CFMT is a measure of short-term face memory ability.

Keywords

• Intelligence;
• CHC theory;
• Face identity recognition;
• Prosopagnosia

How the brain consolidates memory during deep sleep

Dr. Jon Lieff is always producing well documented and insightful information at his blog

How the brain consolidates memory during deep sleep

Research strongly suggests that sleep, which constitutes about a third of our lives, is crucial for learning and forming long-term memories. But…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on medicalxpress.com

Research Byte: Lasting effects of quality of schooling: Evidence from PISA and PIAAC via BrowZine

New Glossary of Brain Science Terms

New Glossary of Brain Science Terms

Which part of the brain is involved in consciousness and emotion…and what exactly is the limbic system anyway? Our latest publication—A Glossary of Key Brain…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on danablog.org

"Intelligent" intelligence testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability #6: Within-Gc assessment tree

Here is the second WJ IV Within-CHC Assessment Tree--this time for Gc.  See prior post where I explain the basis of these groupings (example is for Gf-tree) and what the various arrows and fonts designate.   I am now also including a tabular form of the information.  This is part of my "Intelligent intelligence testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities" series.

A PDF copy, which is quite clean, can be downloaded here.

Relevant broad and narrow definitions are below

Comprehension-knowledge (Gc):  The depth and breadth of declarative and procedural knowledge and skills valued by one’s culture. Comprehension of language, words, and general knowledge developed through experience, learning and acculturation.

• General (verbal) information (K0): The breadth and depth of knowledge that one’s culture deems essential, practical, or worthwhile for most everyone to know.
• Language development (LD): The general understanding of spoken language at the level of words, idioms, and sentences.  An intermediate factor between broad Gc and other narrow Gc abilities.  It usually represents a number of narrow language abilities working together in concert—therefore it is not likely a unique ability. 
•  Lexical knowledge (VL): The knowledge of the word definitions and the concepts that underlie them. Vocabulary knowledge.
• Listening ability (LS): The ability to understand speech, starting with comprehending single words and increasing to long complex verbal statements. 

Domain-specific knowledge (Gkn): The depth, breadth, and mastery of specialized declarative and procedural knowledge typically acquired through one’s career, hobby, or other passionate interest. The Gkn domain is likely to contain more narrow abilities than are currently listed in the CHC model.  

• Knowledge of culture (K2): The range of knowledge about the humanities (e.g., philosophy, religion, history, literature, music, and art).

Click on images to enlarge and for clearer image.

I, Kevin McGrew, am solely responsible for this content.  The information presented here (and in this series) does not necessarily reflect the views of my WJ IV coauthors or that of the publisher of the WJ IV (HMH).

"Intelligent" intelligence testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability #2.5: What is Kaufman's "intelligent" intelligence testing?

This should have been one of the first posts in my "intelligent" testing series.  Better late than never.  Alan Kaufman's 1979 "Intelligent intelligence testing with the WISC-R" had a profound impcat on my intelligence testing practices when I was a practicing school psychologist and in many ways influenced my career to move into applied psychometrics, scholarship, etc.  If you prefer a PDF copy, with one slide per page, it can be found here.

What is "intelligent" intelligence testing from Kevin McGrew

Research Byte: Improving time processing ability in children with disabilities

Click on image to enlarge

An interesting study demonstrating that it may be possible to improve the time processing abilities of children with various disabilities. Given that time processing abilities have been implicated in certain key cognitive functions (working memory, attentional control, executive functions) this study is intriguing. I am particularly interested in learning more about the time processing ability measures and the potential to use them in future intelligence test batteries...as well as where such temporal abilities fit in the CHC model of cognitive abilities.

 

Posted with Blogsy from my iPad mini 4

Large multi-center study to test videogame-like digital therapy as (potentially) FDA-cleared ADHD treatment [feedly]

----
Large multi-center study to test videogame-like digital therapy as (potentially) FDA-cleared ADHD treatment
// SharpBrains

Akili Labs recruits for ADHD trial with ambitions of FDA clearance for digital medicine (MedCity News)

"Akili Labs has kicked off open enrollment for a clinical trial of its Project EVO video game platform in a quest to secure for 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for its lead indication — attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The trial is recruiting at least 300 participants aged 8-12 years old who have been diagnosed with ADHD. It will evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Project EVO platform, according to a company statement. The ultimate goal is to provide a drug alternative for children with ADHD and Akili Labs CEO Eddie Martucci views digital therapeutics as the way to do that…If the trial meets its endpoints, the company plans to submit Project EVO for FDA approval.

In a phone interview in February Martucci said, "We want this to stand alongside Adderall and other drugs as a doctor-prescribed treatment."

Study: Software Treatment for Actively Reducing Severity of ADHD (STARS-ADHD) (ClinicalTrials.gov)

• Brief summary: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of videogame-like digital therapies on attentional functioning and symptoms in children diagnosed with ADHD.
• Description: The study will be a randomized, parallel group, controlled trial of two videogame-like (iPad-based) digital therapies. The study will consist of 3 primary phases: Screening, Washout/Baseline, and Treatment. During the Screening Phase (Day -28 to Day -7), participants will undergo screening to evaluate eligibility for the study. Screening may take place up to 28 days before the Baseline Visit (Day 0). For those children currently on medication for ADHD the Washout period will begin 7 days prior to Baseline where treatment will be discontinued. On Day 0, the Baseline visit will occur wherein additional eligibility criteria will be established. The Treatment Phase (Day 1 to Day 27) will involve using the digital therapy at home for each participant followed by an In-Clinic assessment on Day 28 to assess key outcomes. Compliance with treatment/use requirements will be monitored remotely during this phase.

To learn more:

Best prac­tices to assess and enhance brain func­tion via mobile devices and wearables from SharpBrains

----

Shared via my feedly reader

******

Book review: Intelligence & abilities via BrowZine

Book review: Intelligence & abilities
McDaniel, Michael A.; List, Sheila K.
Intelligence, Vol. 57 – 2016: 58 - 59

10.1016/j.intell.2016.01.011

University of Minnesota Users:
http://login.ezproxy.lib.umn.edu/login?url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289616300010

Non-University of Minnesota Users: (Full text may not be available)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289616300010

Accessed with BrowZine, supported by University of Minnesota.

Human 2.0: Tech Upgrades for the Nervous System [Cartoon]

Human 2.0: Tech Upgrades for the Nervous System [Cartoon]

This article was originally published with the title "Human 2.0" ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Dwayne Godwin Dwayne Godwin is a neuroscientist at the…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on scientificamerican.com

"Intelligent" Intelligence Testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability #5: Who do some individuals obtain markedly different scores on different Gwm tests?

This is the second PPT module (from my "Intelligent" Intelligence Testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability series) dealing with evaluating score differences between different tests of working memory (Gwm) on the WJ IV.  It is recommended that one view the brief first installment ("Intelligent" intelligence testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability #4: Evaluating within-CHC domain test score differences) before viewing this second installment.

"Intelligent" intelligence testing: Why do some individuals obtain markedly different scores on different Gwm tests? from Kevin McGrew

By clicking on the "in" icon in the lower right corner of the control pane, one can reach a site to download the slides.  For those who want a crisp clear set of the slides in PDF, click on this link. 

IQs Corner-Intelligent IQ Insights

Check out one of my two daily content curated e-newspapers

IQs Corner-Intelligent IQ Insights

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on paper.li

The Puzzle of Paul Meehl: An intellectual history of research criticism in psychology - Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

The Puzzle of Paul Meehl: An intellectual history of research criticism in psychology - Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

There's nothing wrong with Meehl. He's great. The…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on andrewgelman.com

Progress and Problems in Brain Mapping

Progress and Problems in Brain Mapping

The holy grail of many neuroscients is to map neuronal connections and from this explain how the brain (and mind) works. There are approximately 80 billion…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on jonlieffmd.com

"Intelligent" intelligence testing with the WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability #4: Evaluating within-CHC domain test score differences

Recently the following was posted to the CHC listerv.

"While working on an assessment this morning, I found another example of Verbal Attention as a measure of Gwm being discordant from other measures of short-term and working memory: 

18 year old with high functioning autism and LD:
WAIS IV FSIQ = 84; WJ IV GIA = 81
WJ IV Verbal Attn - 91, Story Recall - 91, Vis Aud Learning - 76;
(Gc-73, Gf-94, Gv-121, Ga- 61, Gs-82)
WAIS-IV DSF-3, DSB - 7, DSS - 6, Arith - 4
CTOPP 2 Phonol Memory - 70; Rapid Naming - 52  

Thoughts on the Verbal Attention score of 91?"

A number of members provided some good responses.  I have been working on a response, and this is installment #1.  The rest of the response, which gets into substantive hypotheses about why Verbal Attention may differ from other Gwm test scores, is almost done and will be posted (hopefully) by the end of this week.

I apologize for not continuing my "Intelligent" intelligence testing series...it has been a long time since the last post in that series.  Just busy busy busy.

Enjoy

PS.   By clicking on the "in" icon in the lower right corner of the control pane, one can reach a site to download the slides.  For those who want a crisp clear set of the slides in PDF, click on this link.

"Intelligent" intelligence testing: Evaluating wihtin CHC domain test score differences from Kevin McGrew

Research Byte: Building a Science of Individual Differences from fMRI.

Building a Science of Individual Differences from fMRI.

2016 Apr 29. pii: S1364-6613(16)30007-9. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.03.014. [Epub ahead of print] 1Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences,…

Read it on Flipboard

Read it on ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Research Byte: A new measure of imagination abiltiy

 

 

Original Research ARTICLE

Front. Psychol., 18 April 2016 | http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00496

A New Measure of Imagination Ability: Anatomical Brain Imaging Correlates

Rex E. Jung^1,2*, Ranee A. Flores² and Dan Hunter³

• ¹Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
• ²Department of Neurosurgery, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
• ³Hunter Higgs, LLC, Boston, MA, USA

Imagination involves episodic memory retrieval, visualization, mental simulation, spatial navigation, and future thinking, making it a complex cognitive construct. Prior studies of imagination have attempted to study various elements of imagination (e.g., visualization), but none have attempted to capture the entirety of imagination ability in a single instrument. Here we describe the Hunter Imagination Questionnaire (HIQ), an instrument designed to assess imagination over an extended period of time, in a naturalistic manner. We hypothesized that the HIQ would be related to measures of creative achievement and to a network of brain regions previously identified to be important to imagination/creative abilities. Eighty subjects were administered the HIQ in an online format; all subjects were administered a broad battery of tests including measures of intelligence, personality, and aptitude, as well as structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (sMRI). Responses of the HIQ were found to be normally distributed, and exploratory factor analysis yielded four factors. Internal consistency of the HIQ ranged from 0.76 to 0.79, and two factors (“Implementation” and “Learning”) were significantly related to measures of Creative Achievement (Scientific—r = 0.26 and Writing—r = 0.31, respectively), suggesting concurrent validity. We found that the HIQ and its factors were related to a broad network of brain volumes including increased bilateral hippocampi, lingual gyrus, and caudal/rostral middle frontal lobe, and decreased volumes within the nucleus accumbens and regions within the default mode network (e.g., precuneus, posterior cingulate, transverse temporal lobe). The HIQ was found to be a reliable and valid measure of imagination in a cohort of normal human subjects, and was related to brain volumes previously identified as central to imagination including episodic memory retrieval (e.g., hippocampus). We also identified compelling evidence suggesting imagination ability linked to decreased volumes involving the nucleus accumbens and regions within the default mode network. Future research will be important to assess the stability of this instrument in different populations, as well as the complex interaction between imagination and creativity in the human brain.