Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVoorspoels, Wouter
dc.contributor.authorStorms, Gert
dc.contributor.authorLongenecker, Julia
dc.contributor.authorVerheyen, Steven
dc.contributor.authorWeinberger, Daniel R.
dc.contributor.authorElvevåg, Brita
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-26T11:16:37Z
dc.date.available2014-03-26T11:16:37Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.description.abstractAssessing verbal output in category fluency tasks provides a sensitive indicator of cortical dysfunction. The most common metrics are the overall number of words produced and the number of errors. Two main observations have been made about the structure of the output, first that there is a temporal component to it with words being generated in spurts, and second that the clustering pattern may reflect a search for meanings such that the ‘clustering’ is attributable to the activation of a specific semantic field in memory. A number of sophisticated approaches to examining the structure of this clustering have been developed, and a core theme is that the similarity relations between category members will reveal the mental semantic structure of the category underlying an individual's responses, which can then be visualized by a number of algorithms, such as MDS, hierarchical clustering, ADDTREE, ADCLUS or SVD. Such approaches have been applied to a variety of neurological and psychiatric populations, and the general conclusion has been that the clinical condition systematically distorts the semantic structure in the patients, as compared to the healthy controls. In the present paper we explore this approach to understanding semantic structure using category fluency data. On the basis of a large pool of patients with schizophrenia (n = 204) and healthy control participants (n = 204), we find that the methods are problematic and unreliable to the extent that it is not possible to conclude that any putative difference reflects a systematic difference between the semantic representations in patients and controls. Moreover, taking into account the unreliability of the methods, we find that the most probable conclusion to be made is that no difference in underlying semantic representation exists. The consequences of these findings to understanding semantic structure, and the use of category fluency data, in cortical dysfunction are discussed.en
dc.identifier.citationCortex (2013), online before printen
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 1089356
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2013.09.006
dc.identifier.issn0010-9452
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/6101
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-uit_munin_5793
dc.language.isoengen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccess
dc.subjectVDP::Social science: 200::Psychology: 260::Biological psychology: 261en
dc.subjectVDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Psykologi: 260::Biologisk psykologi: 261en
dc.subjectVDP::Social science: 200::Psychology: 260::Clinical psychology: 262en
dc.subjectVDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Psykologi: 260::Klinisk psykologi: 262en
dc.subjectVDP::Social science: 200::Psychology: 260::Cognitive psychology: 267en
dc.subjectVDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Psykologi: 260::Kognitiv psykologi: 267en
dc.subjectVDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Clinical medical disciplines: 750::Neurology: 752en
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750::Psykiatri, barnepsykiatri: 757en
dc.subjectVDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Clinical medical disciplines: 750::Psychiatry, child psychiatry: 757en
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750::Nevrologi: 752en
dc.titleDeriving semantic structure from category fluency: Clustering techniques and their pitfallsen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen
dc.typePeer revieweden


File(s) in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record