Patterns of proactive interference in CVLT-II: evidence of a low-organized, disorganized, and highly organized learning style

ABSTRACT

Objective

Previous studies have interpreted proactive interference (PI) either as indicating executive dysfunction or a normal process indicating deep level encoding. We investigated these competing models of PI in a large clinical sample using cluster analyses. We expected to find clusters defined by high PI but otherwise characterized by either EF impairment or of good memory performance.

Method

File records of 731 patients with neurological or psychiatric disorders were analyzed. PI-scores, false positive recognition errors, and semantic organization scores on the California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II) were subjected to cluster analyses. Clusters were compared regarding buildup and release from PI, memory performance and strategy measures, measures of intelligence, EF, and processing speed.

Results

The analyses revealed six analyzable clusters. Two clusters showed no buildup of PI and normal release from PI. Discriminability was impaired both in List A and B. Learning acquisition and speeded measures of EF were reduced. One cluster showed both buildup of PI and problems with releasing from PI, and particularly impaired discriminability of List B. Semantic organization was low. Learning consolidation and EF speeded measures were impaired. Two other clusters showed buildup of PI, but no problem with release. Learning was highly organized, and they showed good memory and normal neuropsychological performance.

Conclusions

Results shows differentiation between a low organized EF dysfunction pattern with no PI, a disorganized PI pattern also indicating EF dysfunction and a highly organized pattern where PI seems to be the price to pay for high effort put into the learning process.

KEYWORDS:

• Proactive interference
• CVLT
• executive dysfunction
• semantic organization
• Verbal memory

Acknowledgments

The authors have no competing interests to declare. The study was performed without external funding.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.