The DOI matches its Crossref record.
DUAL TASK PERFORMANCE AND PROCESSING RESOURCES IN NORMAL SUBJECTS AND PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE
Abstract
In recent years, there has been a growing consensus among investigators that the presence or absence of external cues guiding behaviour and attention is an important factor in determining whether or not deficits are found in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). In an earlier study, the authors suggested that the pattern of impaired and intact performance could be explained in terms of differential resource demands of the tasks, combined with depleted levels of central processing resources in PD patients. Two experiments are reported, both employing dual-task paradigms. The first assessed, in normal subjects, the relative processing demands of a cued and an uncued version of the Stroop task. The results supported the proposal that the noncued task made greater demands on the subject's limited processing resources. Further, performing a resource demanding secondary task concurrently with the Stroop test produced, in normal subjects, the same pattern of impaired performance as that reported previously in PD patients. In the second experiment the same dual-task paradigm was employed with a group of PD patients and normal aged-matched controls. Only the patients showed an increase in reaction time on the Stroop task when performing a resource demanding secondary task. The patients also showed an interfering effect with concurrent foot tapping but not with an articulatory suppression task. The results were taken to support the hypothesis that PD patients have depleted central processing resources. In considering the present data, alternative explanations for the results are considered, in particular the possibility that they represent a deficit in switching processing resources between two tasks as the combined demands outweigh available resources.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Attention and the control of posture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research
Woollacott, M., & Shumway-Cook, A. (2002) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00156-4 · Cited by 2,690
Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension
Caplan, D., & Waters, G. S. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99001788 · Cited by 1,077
Pathophysiology of bradykinesia in Parkinson's disease
Berardelli, A. (2001) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/124.11.2131 · Cited by 906
Stride length regulation in Parkinson's disease: Normalization strategies and underlying mechanisms
Morris, M. E., Iansek, R., Matyas, T. A., & Summers, J. J. (1996) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/119.2.551 · Cited by 873
Intuition: A social cognitive neuroscience approach.
Lieberman, M. D. (2000) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.1.109 · Cited by 803
Metadata
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1991-02
- Volume
- 114 ( Pt 1A)
- Pages
- 215-31
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- OpenAlex
- W1841405833
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: DUAL TASK PERFORMANCE AND PROCESSING RESOURCES IN NORMAL SUBJECTS AND PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.brain.a101858
- The paper
- DUAL TASK PERFORMANCE AND PROCESSING RESOURCES IN NORMAL SUBJECTS AND PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE. (1991). Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.brain.a101858
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.