Exploring the utility of process scores in elucidating the role of cognitive and affective factors that influence verbal fluency performance in Parkinson’s disease

Abstract

Objectives

Cognitive and affective factors have been implicated in verbal fluency (VF) performance in Parkinson’s disease (PD). This exploratory study aimed to investigate the relationships between cognitive and affective variables on traditional (“core”) and "process” (error and interval) scores of VF and elucidate unique information these scores may provide regarding mechanisms underlying VF.

Methods

Sixty-two PD patients without dementia completed clinical neuropsychological examinations consisting of attention, processing speed, language, executive functioning, visuospatial, memory, and mood measures. Hierarchical regression and negative binomial regression analyses were used to evaluate relationships between outcome and predictor variables.

Results

Generativity results revealed that processing speed and working memory explained up to 34% of the variance of total letter fluency responses (p = <.001) and processing speed explained 24% of the variance for total semantic fluency (p = .003). For category switching generativity, only age predicted 20% of the variance (p = .01). Two executive functioning measures were negatively associated with error production over the duration (b = −.055, p = .028; b = −.062, p = .004) and final 45-second interval (b = −.072, p = .003; b = −.044, p = .033) of the category switching task. In the initial 15-second task interval, a positive predictive relationship between error production and indifference apathy (b = .616, p = .044) was demonstrated.

Conclusions

Findings demonstrate the potential utility of "process” scores in detecting subtle cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease patients without dementia and tentatively evidence the role of indifference apathy in task initiation.

Keywords:

• Errors
• executive functioning
• frontal lobe
• apathy
• energization

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the statistical consultation support from the Institute of Translational Health Sciences (grant number T TR002319).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

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