The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether phonemic and semantic verbal fluency were more related to aspects of language processing than executive functioning (EF). An exploratory factor analysis was performed on a college-aged sample of 320 healthy participants using principle axis factoring and promax rotation on nine measures of EF. The first three factors, labeled: working memory, fluid reasoning, and shifting/updating, were extracted and used as latent executive variables. Participants were also split into low, medium, and high phonemic and semantic verbal fluency ability groups. Phonemic and semantic fluency correlated similarly across all three extracted EF factors and word knowledge. Using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs), there was a main effect for both phonemic and semantic verbal fluency groups and all outcome variables (i.e., the EF factors and word knowledge). Tukey HSD post hoc analyses showed that those in the low verbal fluency ability groups had significantly lower scores across all outcome measures compared to the high verbal fluency ability groups. Across all analyses, semantic fluency had stronger relations with the EF factors, signifying a large executive component involved in the task. Both phonemic and semantic fluency were similarly related to multiple dimensions of EF and word knowledge and should be considered executive language tasks.

This study extended prior findings by examining how Big-5 personality traits are related to four dimensions of problematic pornography viewing: functional problems, excessive use, control difficulties, and avoidance of negative emotions. Participants (n = 569 women and n = 253 men) responded to an online survey. Structural equation modeling indicated that for men, neuroticism was a positive correlate with all dimensions of problematic pornography viewing, extraversion positively correlated with functional problems, excessive use, and control difficulties; and openness-to-experience negatively correlated with functional problems. For women, neuroticism positively correlated with avoidance of negative emotions; openness-to-experience positively correlated with excessive use and use to avoid negative emotions; and conscientiousness negatively correlated with control difficulties. A series of significant interactions across personality dimensions were also observed. Connections to other studies and areas for future research are discussed.

Background Cognitive symptoms are often reported by those with a history of COVID-19 infection. No comprehensive meta-analysis of neurocognitive outcomes related to COVID-19 exists despite the influx of studies after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study meta-analysed observational research comparing cross-sectional neurocognitive outcomes in adults with COVID-19 (without severe medical/psychiatric comorbidity) to healthy controls (HCs) or norm-referenced data. Methods Data were extracted from 54 studies published between January 2020 and June 2023. Hedges’ g was used to index effect sizes, which were pooled using random-effects modelling. Moderating variables were investigated using meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Results Omnibus meta-analysis of 696 effect sizes extracted across 54 studies (COVID-19 n=6676, HC/norm-reference n=12 986; average time since infection=~6 months) yielded a small but significant effect indicating patients with COVID-19 performed slightly worse than HCs on cognitive measures (g=−0.36; 95% CI=−0.45 to –0.28), with high heterogeneity (Q=242.30, p<0.001, τ=0.26). Significant within-domain effects was yielded by cognitive screener (g=−0.55; 95% CI=−0.75 to –0.36), processing speed (g=−0.44; 95% CI=−0.57 to –0.32), global cognition (g=−0.40; 95% CI=−0.71 to –0.09), simple/complex attention (g=−0.38; 95% CI=−0.46 to –0.29), learning/memory (g=−0.34; 95% CI=−0.46 to –0.22), language (g=−0.34; 95% CI=−0.45 to –0.24) and executive function (g=−0.32; 95% CI=−0.43 to –0.21); but not motor (g=−0.40; 95% CI=−0.89 to 0.10), visuospatial/construction (g=−0.09; 95% CI=−0.23 to 0.05) and orientation (g=−0.02; 95% CI=−0.17 to 0.14). COVID-19 samples with elevated depression, anxiety, fatigue and disease severity yielded larger effects. Conclusion Mild cognitive deficits are associated with COVID-19 infection, especially as detected by cognitive screeners and processing speed tasks. We failed to observe clinically meaningful cognitive impairments (as measured by standard neuropsychological instruments) in people with COVID-19 without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities.

Medical simulation is widely used in the United States medical curriculum. However, learning outcomes based on simulation have yet to be reported. In this study, we aim to characterize the objective performance of first- and second-year medical students following eight weeks of medical simulation-based learning. First- (n=25) and second-year (n=15) medical students were recruited for this study. We designed and administered a novel pre-experience examination to collect participant demography and assess simulation and non-simulation knowledge. Following 14 high-fidelity simulation scenarios over the course of eight weeks, we administered an identical post-experience examination and compared performance, primarily using a within-subjects analytic design. Student performance improved by an average of 18% following the medical simulation experience, and first-year students demonstrated greater benefit (22%) as compared to second-years (12%). Relative to first-years, second-year students showed higher overall performance on both pre- and post-examination. Demographic factors and prior medical experience were not significantly associated with assessment performance and score improvement. Our data supported the efficacy of simulation-based learning as evidenced by the significant improvement in objective performance on a standardized examination. That is, both first- and second-year medical students demonstrated test-score improvement following an eight-week medical simulation program. Of note, the first-year students exhibited greater benefit (at the group level). Importantly, these findings were statistically unrelated to participant demographic and background variables. Collectively, this study provides preliminary evidence that medical simulation in the pre-clinical phase of undergraduate medical education is an effective tool for student learning.

The high potential for secondary gain among college students presenting for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) evaluations highlights the need for psychometrically sound embedded validity indicators. The purpose of this study was to develop new validity indicators specific to feigned ADHD for the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and compare them to preexisting imbedded PAI validity measures. PAI scales that were theoretically related to feigned ADHD were evaluated. A binomial (ADHD simulators, n = 138, and genuine ADHD, n = 142) logistic regression was conducted with selected PAI scales and subscales. Classification rates were compared between the new and existing validity scales. A similar approach was used for item-level data in a second study in a subgroup of the original sample. The derived PAI scale-based logistic regression had a sensitivity of 54% and specificity of 92%. This algorithm accurately identified 97% of healthy controls as not feigning ADHD and correctly identified 98% of a no diagnosis group and 75% of a mood/anxiety disorders group. Classification accuracy of the new index was superior to the majority of existing PAI validity scales across groups. An item-level PAI algorithm had a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 97% for identifying feigned ADHD. New validity measures were compared to existing PAI validity indicators and performed better than many of them in this study. The algorithms developed in this study of ADHD simulators and genuine ADHD cases have adequate sensitivity and good specificity and appear to function differently than other PAI symptom validity scales.