JNNP

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jahanshahi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Marsden, C. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jahanshahi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Marsden, C. D.

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 1993, Vol 56, 1169-1177


PAPERS

A comparative study of simple and choice reaction time in Parkinson's, Huntington's and cerebellar disease

M Jahanshahi, RG Brown and CD Marsden
Department of Clinical Neurology, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom.

The aim of the study was to compare the quantitative and qualitative similarities and differences in the performance of patients with Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease and cerebellar disease on a number of reaction time tasks. Simple reaction time (SRT), uncued and fully cued four choice (CRT) tasks were performed by eight patients with Parkinson's disease after withdrawal of dopaminergic medication for an average of 14.4 hours; by seven non-demented patients with Huntington's disease and by eight patients with cerebellar disease. An S1 (warning signal/precue)-S2 (imperative stimulus) paradigm was used in all tasks, with the S1-S2 interval randomly varying between 0, 200, 800, 1600 and 3200 ms across trials. The patients with Huntington's disease had a significantly longer SRT than those with Parkinson's disease. None of the other group differences in uncued and unwarned SRT and CRT was significant. For the patients with Parkinson's disease and those with cerebellar disease, unwarned SRT was faster than uncued and unwarned CRT. For the patients with Huntington's disease, this CRT/SRT difference was not significant. A warning signal before the imperative stimulus resulted in a reduction of reaction time in all three groups. Advance information provided by S1 about the response that would be required by S2 was used by patients in all three groups, evident from reaction times in the fully cued CRT task being faster than those in the uncued CRT condition.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


© 1993 by Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C. Beste, C. Saft, J. Andrich, R. Gold, and M. Falkenstein
Stimulus-Response Compatibility in Huntington's Disease: A Cognitive-Neurophysiological Analysis
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1213 - 1223.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
K. Finke, P. Bublak, M. Dose, H. J. Muller, and W. X. Schneider
Parameter-based assessment of spatial and non-spatial attentional deficits in Huntington's disease
Brain, May 1, 2006; 129(5): 1137 - 1151.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
A. Berardelli, J. C. Rothwell, P. D. Thompson, and M. Hallett
Pathophysiology of bradykinesia in Parkinson's disease
Brain, November 1, 2001; 124(11): 2131 - 2146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Learn. Mem.Home page
L M Parsons, J M Bower, J H Gao, J Xiong, J Li, and P T Fox
Lateral cerebellar hemispheres actively support sensory acquisition and discrimination rather than motor control.
Learn. Mem., January 1, 1997; 4(1): 49 - 62.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 1993 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.