INS NYC 2024 Program

Poster	Poster Session 11 Program Schedule 02/17/2024 10:45 am - 12:00 pm Room: Shubert Complex (Posters 1-60) Poster Session 11: Cultural Neuropsychology \| Education/Training \| Professional Practice Issues Final Abstract #30 Cross-cultural construct validation of the Stroop interference task in Black, Indigenous, People of Color, in a pediatric population Julius Flowers, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Rayna Hirst, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Ashlynn Steinbaugh, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Talamahe'a Tupou, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Daniel Baldini, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Annie Lakhani, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Henry Eve, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Jakob Hopper, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States Category: Cross Cultural Neuropsychology/ Clinical Cultural Neuroscience Keyword 1: performance validity Keyword 2: conflict monitoring Keyword 3: pediatric neuropsychology Objective: Many cognitive abilities contribute to Stroop color-word task performance in adults (SCWT; i.e., color-word interference), including visual search speed, working memory (WM), and cognitive flexibility (Periáñez et al., 2020). Literature suggests that perceived neighborhood safety, structural racism, and social stratification also impact cognitive abilities (Assari et al., 2021). Additionally, assessing performance validity tests (PVTs) is vital in pediatric evaluations, and studies have noted differences (e.g., higher PVT failure rates) by ethnicity (Hromas et al., 2022). Previous studies examined cognitive processes that contributed to Stroop interference performance (i.e., inhibitory control; IC) in youth and found that IC as measured by SCWT differed between Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) and White youth in cognitive skills involving WM (Flowers et al., 2022). However, no studies have examined the contribution of ethnicity and PVT performance to Stroop interference in youth. Participants and Methods: Healthy youth athletes (n = 174) aged 8-16 (mean = 12.07) completed the SCWT and other neuropsychological measures during baseline evaluation in a sports concussion program. This project conducted two studies. In Study 1, a linear regression examined the contribution of speeded visual search (Trail Making Test; TMT), WM (WISC-IV Working Memory Index), processing speed (PS; TMT, verbal comprehension (WISC-IV Verbal Comprehension Index), PVTs (standalone: Rey-15 and TOMM; embedded validity indicators or EVIs: Reliable Digit Span (RDS) and TMT ratio), visuospatial abilities (WISC-IV Block Design), visual processing (WISC-IV Matrix Reasoning), and cognitive flexibility (TMT) to IC (SCWT) in the whole youth sample. Utilizing the same analysis, Study 2 explored differences in contribution to IC cross-culturally by comparing BIPOC (n = 74) to White youth (n = 100). Results: In Study 1, TMT ratio (p=0.00), only TMT visual scanning (p=0.00), and RDS (p=0.03) contributed to SCWT performance (p=0.00) in the whole youth sample. However, Study 2 results showed that in BIPOC youth, only one EVI (TMT ratio) requiring higher-order cognitive processes predicted SCWT performance. Further, visual processing was a significant predictor of SCWT performance in White youth (p=0.013) but not in BIPOC youth (ps>.05). Conclusions: In contrast to adults, results revealed that WM and PS did not significantly predict IC in youth. However, an EVI requiring cognitive flexibility and PS components (TMT ratio) predicted IC. Furthermore, only the EVI (TMT ratio) predicted IC within both groups. Moreover, one EVI (RDS) with a WM component did not predict IC in BIPOC youth. In contrast, standalone PVTs (Rey-15, TOMM) requiring lower cognitive processes did not predict IC regardless of ethnicity. Therefore, EVIs comprising an executive functioning (EF) and WM component may not accurately represent effort in youth, perhaps due to their underdeveloped EF relative to adults (Lezak et al., 2012; Nyongesa et al., 2019). Study 2 findings captured the impact of ethnicity on cognitive contributors to IC and demonstrated how other factors may impact PVT performance (AACN, 2021). Understanding cross-cultural differences in cognitive processes allows clinicians to better detect deficits and understand how they impact IC. This may lead to a better understanding of EF, WM, PS, and validity assessment in healthy youth.

Poster

02/17/2024
10:45 am - 12:00 pm
Room: Shubert Complex (Posters 1-60)

Poster Session 11: Cultural Neuropsychology | Education/Training | Professional Practice Issues

Final Abstract #30

Cross-cultural construct validation of the Stroop interference task in Black, Indigenous, People of Color, in a pediatric population

Julius Flowers, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Rayna Hirst, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Ashlynn Steinbaugh, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Talamahe'a Tupou, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Daniel Baldini, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Annie Lakhani, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Henry Eve, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States
Jakob Hopper, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, United States

Category: Cross Cultural Neuropsychology/ Clinical Cultural Neuroscience

Keyword 1: performance validity
Keyword 2: conflict monitoring
Keyword 3: pediatric neuropsychology

Objective:

Many cognitive abilities contribute to Stroop color-word task performance in adults (SCWT; i.e., color-word interference), including visual search speed, working memory (WM), and cognitive flexibility (Periáñez et al., 2020). Literature suggests that perceived neighborhood safety, structural racism, and social stratification also impact cognitive abilities (Assari et al., 2021). Additionally, assessing performance validity tests (PVTs) is vital in pediatric evaluations, and studies have noted differences (e.g., higher PVT failure rates) by ethnicity (Hromas et al., 2022). Previous studies examined cognitive processes that contributed to Stroop interference performance (i.e., inhibitory control; IC) in youth and found that IC as measured by SCWT differed between Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) and White youth in cognitive skills involving WM (Flowers et al., 2022). However, no studies have examined the contribution of ethnicity and PVT performance to Stroop interference in youth.

Participants and Methods:

Healthy youth athletes (n = 174) aged 8-16 (mean = 12.07) completed the SCWT and other neuropsychological measures during baseline evaluation in a sports concussion program. This project conducted two studies. In Study 1, a linear regression examined the contribution of speeded visual search (Trail Making Test; TMT), WM (WISC-IV Working Memory Index), processing speed (PS; TMT, verbal comprehension (WISC-IV Verbal Comprehension Index), PVTs (standalone: Rey-15 and TOMM; embedded validity indicators or EVIs: Reliable Digit Span (RDS) and TMT ratio), visuospatial abilities (WISC-IV Block Design), visual processing (WISC-IV Matrix Reasoning), and cognitive flexibility (TMT) to IC (SCWT) in the whole youth sample. Utilizing the same analysis, Study 2 explored differences in contribution to IC cross-culturally by comparing BIPOC (n = 74) to White youth (n = 100).

Results:

In Study 1, TMT ratio (p=0.00), only TMT visual scanning (p=0.00), and RDS (p=0.03) contributed to SCWT performance (p=0.00) in the whole youth sample. However, Study 2 results showed that in BIPOC youth, only one EVI (TMT ratio) requiring higher-order cognitive processes predicted SCWT performance. Further, visual processing was a significant predictor of SCWT performance in White youth (p=0.013) but not in BIPOC youth (ps>.05).

Conclusions:

In contrast to adults, results revealed that WM and PS did not significantly predict IC in youth. However, an EVI requiring cognitive flexibility and PS components (TMT ratio) predicted IC. Furthermore, only the EVI (TMT ratio) predicted IC within both groups. Moreover, one EVI (RDS) with a WM component did not predict IC in BIPOC youth. In contrast, standalone PVTs (Rey-15, TOMM) requiring lower cognitive processes did not predict IC regardless of ethnicity. Therefore, EVIs comprising an executive functioning (EF) and WM component may not accurately represent effort in youth, perhaps due to their underdeveloped EF relative to adults (Lezak et al., 2012; Nyongesa et al., 2019). Study 2 findings captured the impact of ethnicity on cognitive contributors to IC and demonstrated how other factors may impact PVT performance (AACN, 2021). Understanding cross-cultural differences in cognitive processes allows clinicians to better detect deficits and understand how they impact IC. This may lead to a better understanding of EF, WM, PS, and validity assessment in healthy youth.