Test-Retest Reliability of the Lateralized Attention Network Test

1. Results IVA shows no difference between learning disabled & normal controls No effect of NF • Test-Retest Reliability of the Lateralized Attention Network Test • Deanna Greene1, Kristin Herzberg1, Anat Barnea2,, Amir Raz3, & Eran Zaidel1 • 1Department of Psychology, University of California at Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Bio-Keshev Center, Kibutz Givat Chaim Ichud, Israel; • 3Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; • Introduction • Attention can be viewed as a system of three separate and independent networks: Conflict resolution, spatial Orienting, and Alerting. • Posner and associates devised a test to measure the three attention networks: the Attention Network Test (ANT). • We developed an adaptation of the ANT to measure the networks separately within each hemisphere: the Lateralized Attention Network Test (LANT). • We ran four versions of the LANT on a population of normal young adults and have assessed the test-retest reliability of the task. • Definitions: • Conflict: C = Reaction time (RT) for trials with Incongruent flankers minus RT for trials with Congruent flankers • Orienting: O = RT for trials with Invalid cues minus RT for trials with Valid cues • Orienting Benefit: OB = Center cues minus Valid cues Orienting Cost: OC = Invalid cues minus Center cues • Alerting: A = RT for trials with No cues minus RT for trials with Double cues ‘+’ = significantly reliable ‘--’ = did not reach significance Reliabilty Versions LANT: • Presented tachistoscopically for 170ms to the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF) • Target: middle arrow pointing up/down. (see figure) • Flanker arrows: Congruent- same direction as target Incongruent- opposite direction as target Neutral- straight lines Methods Results Estimates of attention networks Conclusions Version 2 (small target) yields the best reliability of the attention networks overall and within each hemisphere. 2.Even in the best version, reliability was not high. Therefore, the LANT is not a preferred measure for individual clinical assessment. 3. Version 2 yields significant estimates of all networks, and it has good power for measuring group data in studying hemispheric attention. LVF Congruent flankers Incongruent flankers Neutral flankers in RVF in LVF in LVF • Target preceded by 1 of 5 possible cues: Center- asterisk at central fixation Double- asterisk on both sides of central fixation Valid- asterisk on the side in which the target will appear Invalid- asterisk on the opposite side from which the target will appear No cue RVF • References • Posner, M. I., & Raichle, M. E. (1994). Images of mind. New York: Scientific American Library. • Fan J., McCandliss B.D., Sommer T., Raz A., & Posner M.I. (2002). Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 340-347. • Barnea A., Rassis A., Raz A., Neta Maital., & Zaidel Z., (in preparation) The Lateralized Attention Network Test (LANT). • Barnea A., Rassis A., Neta M., Raz A. and Zaidel, E. (2004). The Lateralized Attention Network Test (LANT) in Children and Adults. Abstract. TENNET, Montreal Canada. Center cue Double cue Valid/ Invalid cue