The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Trail Making Test, Part B: Cognitive Flexibility or Ability to Maintain Set?
Abstract
The Trail Making Test (TMT) is a well-established test sensitive to impairment in multiple cognitive domains. There has been ambiguity about which cognitive demands are placed on the patient by TMT Part B over and above those required to perform TMT Part A. In particular, cognitive flexibility and ability to maintain a complex response set have been 2 competing hypotheses. This study preliminarily examined which of these 2 abilities primarily contributes to Part B performance. A total of 121 clinically referred Veterans Affairs patients were administered the TMT, as well as other tests of executive and other cognitive functions. Regression analyses were used to examine which tests predicted Part B performance above and beyond Part A performance. The results provide preliminary support for TMT Part B performance being more sensitive to cognitiveflexibility (operationalized as Wisconsin Card Sorting Test [WCST], percent perseverative errors) than ability to maintain set (operationalized as WCST, failure to maintain set).
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
Cites
Arbuthnott, K., & Frank, J. (2000) · Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1076/1380-3395(200008)22:4;1-0;ft518 · Cited by 1,087 · cited 1×
“It has been proposed that Part B performance is indicative of executive function, and that difficulty with the task might reflect impaired executive control or the ability to flexibly shift the course of an ongoing activity (Arbuthnott & Frank, 2000; Lamberty et al., 1994; Pontius & Yudowitz, 1980).”
Background
Cited by
Meta-Analysis of Neurobehavioral Outcomes in Very Preterm and/or Very Low Birth Weight Children
Aarnoudse-Moens, C. S. H., Weisglas-Kuperus, N., van Goudoever, J. B., & Oosterlaan, J. (2009) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2008-2816 · Cited by 1,587
Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test
Bowie, C. R., & Harvey, P. D. (2006) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2006.390 · Cited by 1,418
Sarsour, K., Sheridan, M., Jutte, D., Nuru-Jeter, A., Hinshaw, S., & Boyce, W. T. (2011) · Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society · doi:10.1017/s1355617710001335 · Cited by 556
Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment
CHAYTOR, N., SCHMITTEREDGECOMBE, M., & BURR, R. (2006) · Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology · doi:10.1016/j.acn.2005.12.002 · Cited by 462
An fMRI study of the Trail Making Test
Zakzanis, K. K., Mraz, R., & Graham, S. J. (2005) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.03.013 · Cited by 408
Metadata
- Authors
- Kortte, K. B., Horner, M. D., & Windham, W. K.
- Venue
- Applied Neuropsychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 106-109
- ISSN
- 0908-4282 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-4826
- OpenAlex
- W2058665386
- Cited by
- 528
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.13
- 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: The Trail Making Test, Part B: Cognitive Flexibility or Ability to Maintain Set? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15324826an0902_5
- The paper
- Kortte, K. B., Horner, M. D., & Windham, W. K. (2002). The Trail Making Test, Part B: Cognitive Flexibility or Ability to Maintain Set? Applied Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324826an0902_5
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.
