CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 377Genetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesMotor Control and AdaptationDeep Brain Stimulation and Movement Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Procedural learning is impaired in Huntington's disease: Evidence from the serial reaction time task

Knopman, David, Nissen, Mary Jo·1991·Neuropsychologia
DOI 10.1016/0028-3932(91)90085-m
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to test the hypothesis that Huntington's disease (HD) is associated with impairment of procedural learning. We identified 13 patients with mild to moderate HD whose manual performance was still sufficiently intact to assess learning on the serial reaction time (SRT) task. Twelve age-matched neurologically normal control subjects were studied as well. The SRT task was a four-choice reaction time task in which the stimuli followed a sequence (10 items in length) which repeated itself 10 times during each of the first four blocks of trials. During the fifth block of trials, the stimuli were random. Learning was manifested by a reduction in response latency over the first four blocks and an increase in response latency in the fifth (random) block. Learning in this task has been demonstrated in other amnesics of other etiologies. The HD patients were significantly impaired on sequence-specific learning, using the log-transformed reaction time data (P less than 0.004). In addition, in an individual-by-individual analysis, five of the HD patients and none of the control subjects failed to show sequence-specific learning, a difference in proportions that was significant (P less than 0.04). No feature of the standard cognitive or motor assessment of the HD patients was associated with efficacy of procedural learning. HD, including patients with mild disease, was associated with a deficit in procedural learning, consistent with the hypothesis that the stria…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0028-3932(91)90085-m

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bruyn, 1979, Huntington's chorea: current neuropathological status, Adv. Neurol., 23, 83

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 377

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Knopman, D., & Nissen, M. J.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Knopman, David
ORCID
Knopman, David
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1991-01
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
245-254
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0028-3932(91)90085-m
OpenAlex
W1989921507
Cited by
377
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 16
FWCI
2.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Deep Brain Stimulation and Movement Disorders
Keywords
Huntington's disease, procedural learning, serial reaction time task, striatum, reaction time, amnesia
MeSH terms
Adult, Amnesia, Female, Humans, Huntington Disease, Learning, Male, Psychological Tests, Reaction Time

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review