Cited by 552Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsCognitive Functions and Memory

INTERNAL VERSUS EXTERNAL CUES AND THE CONTROL OF ATTENTION IN PARKINSON'S DISEASE

BROWN, R.G., MARSDEN, C.D.·1988·Brain

Abstract

In recent years, several attempts have been made to characterize the nature of the cognitive deficits shown by patients with Parkinson's disease. It has been suggested variously that they have difficulty in switching cognitive set, in performing effortful (or controlled) as opposed to automatic tasks, or that their impairment is found in tasks which maximize the amount of 'self-directed task specific planning'. It is proposed that this latter distinction may be reformulated in terms of the degree of internal versus external attentional control which is required by the task. An experiment is described which attempted to manipulate this parameter. A version of the Stroop colour-word test was used, in which the words 'red' and 'green' were presented in the complementary coloured 'ink'. Subjects responded either to the colour of the ink in which the word was written or the colour named by the word. The relevant attribute changed at intervals during the course of the experiment. In one condition, the relevant stimulus attribute was cued before each trial. In another condition, subjects had to remember which attribute was currently relevant. Results revealed that patients with Parkinson's disease were impaired mainly on the second version of the task which required internal attentional control. The results are discussed in relation to the models of Working Memory (Baddeley, 1986), and attentional control (Norman and Shallice, 1980). Exploration of these models leads to the formulat…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/111.2.323

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
BROWN, R. G., & MARSDEN, C. D.
Affiliations
Parkinson's UK (GB)
Corresponding author
BROWN, R.G.
Venue
Brain
Published
1988
Volume
111
Issue
2
Pages
323-345
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2107061898
Cited by
552
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 16
FWCI
6.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
Parkinson's disease, attentional control, internal cues, external cues, Stroop task, working memory, supervisory attentional system, attentional resources, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Attention, Cues, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Parkinson Disease, 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