Broche-Pérez Y, Cortés-González L

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 52
Paginas: 109-115
Archivo PDF: 102.91 Kb.

RESUMEN

Las alteraciones en las funciones ejecutivas (FE) han sido tradicionalmente relacionadas con comportamientos antisociales; sin embargo, estudios realizados con adolescentes con conductas antisociales son escasos en la actualidad, concentrándose la mayoría de las investigaciones en adultos que han cometido crímenes. Objetivo: examinar el funcionamiento ejecutivo en adolescentes con conductas antisociales comparando con un grupo de adolescentes con conducta prosocial, específicamente en los procesos de planificación de acciones, flexibilidad mental y reversal learning. Material y métodos: se empleó la torre de Hanoi en una secuencia de tareas múltiples con grados variables de complejidad y el test de cartas de Wisconsin. Se conformaron dos grupos, uno por 38 adolescentes con conducta antisocial con edades comprendidas entre 16 y 18 años y un grupo de control equivalente en edad, sexo y escolaridad; con buena conducta social. Resultados: los adolescentes con conducta antisocial mostraron mayores dificultades en los procesos de planificación, flexibilidad mental y reversal learning en comparación con el grupo de control. Conclusiones: los adolescentes con conducta antisocial muestran dificultades en el procesamiento del feedback en comparación con los adolescentes prosociales, además en la planificación y puesta en ejecución de estrategias de solución de problemas. Estos resultados pueden indicar dificultades relacionadas con las estructuras prefrontales; en particular, las regiones prefrontales dorsolaterales y ventromediales y el circuito de procesamiento del feedback.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Lezak MD. Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press. 1995.

2. Packwood S, Hodgetts HM, Tremblay S. A multiperspective approach to the conceptualization of executive functions. J Clin Exp Neuropsych 2011; 33(4):456-70.

3. Fuster JM. Executive frontal functions. Exper Brain Research 2000;133:66-70.

4. Mesulam MM. The human frontal lobes: transcending the default mode through contingent encoding, in Principles of Frontal Lobe Function, D.T. Stuss and R.T. Knight, Editors. Oxford University Press: New York. 2002.

5. Broomhall L. Acquired sociopathy: a neuropsychological study of executive dysfunction in violent offenders. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 2005; 12(2):367-87.

6. Raaijmakers MAJ. Executive functions in preschool children with aggressive behavior: impairments in inhibitory control. J Abnorm Child Psychol 2008; 1(36):1097-107.

7. Greenûeld R, Valliant P. Moral reasoning, executive function, and personality in violent and non violent adult offenders. Psychol Rep 2007; 101:323-33.

8. Hoaken PNS, Allaby DB, Earle J. Executive cognitive functioning and the recognition of facial expressions of emotion in incarcerated violent offenders, non-violent offenders, and controls. Aggressive Behavior 2007; 33:412-21.

9. Baker S, Ireland JL. The link between dyslexic traits, executive functioning, impulsivity, and social self-esteem among an offender and non-offender sample. Law Psychiatry 2007; 30:492-503.

10. Miura H. Differences in frontal lobe function between violent and non violent conduct disorder in male adolescents. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2009; 63:161-6.

11. Roussy S, Toupin J. Behavioral inhibition deficits in juvenile psychopaths. Aggressive Behavior 2000; 26(6):413-24.

12. Santor DA, Ingram A, Kusumakar V. Influence of executive functioning difûculties on verbal aggression in adolescents: moderating effects of winning and losingand increasing and decreasing levels of provocation. Aggressive Behavior 2003; 29:475-88.

13. Willcutt EG. Validity of the executive function theor y of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analytic review. Biological Psychiatry 2005;57:1336-46.

14. Chan RCK. Assessment of executive functions: review o finstruments and identiûcation of critical issues. Arch Clin Neuropsych 2008; 23:201-16.

15. Goel V, Pullarab SD, Grafmanc J. A computational model of frontal lobe dysfunction: working memory and the tower of Hanoi task. Cognitive Science 2001; 25:287-313.

16. Barceló F. Task switching and novelty processing activate a common neural network for cognitive control. J Cogn Neurosc 2006; 18:1734-48.

17. Barceló F, Knight RT. Both random and perseverative errors under lie WCST deûcits in prefrontal patients. Neuropsychologia 2002; 40:349-56.

18. Lie CH. Using fmri to decompose the neural processes underlying the wisconsin card sor ting test. Neuroimage 2006;30: 1038-49.

19. Monchi O. Wisconsin card sorting revisited: distinct neural circuits participating in different stages of the task identiûed by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. The Journal of Neuroscience 2001; 21:7733-41.

20. Berman KF. Physiological activation of a cortical network during performance of the Wisconsin card sorting test: a positron emission tomography study. Neuropsychologia 1995; 33:1027-46.

21. Rogers RD. Contrasting cortical and subcortical activations produced by attentional-set shifting and reversal learning in humans. J Cogn Neurosc 2002;12:142-62.

22. Wang L, Kakigi R, Hoshiyama M. Neural activities during wisconsin card sorting test–meg observation. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research 2001; 12:19-31.

23. Nyhus E. Barceló F. The wisconsin card sorting test and the cognitive assessment of prefrontal executive functions: a critical update. Brain Cognition 2009;71:437-51.

24. Grafman J Cognitive planning deûcitin patients with cerebellar atrophy. Neurol 1992;42(8):1493-6.

25. Mazzocco MMM, Hagerman RJ, Pennington BF. Problem solving limitations among cytogenetically expressing fragile x women. Ame J Medical Genetics 1992;43:78-86.

26. Roberts RJ, Hager LD, Heron C. Prefrontal cognitive processes: working memory and inhibition in the antisaccade task. J Exper Psych General 1994; 123(4):374-93.

27. Morris RG. Planning ability after frontal and temporal lobe lesions in humans:the effects of selection equivocation and working memory load. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1997;14:1007-27.

28. Goel V, Vartanian O. Dissociating the roles of right ventral lateral and dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex in generation and maintenance of hypotheses in set-shift problems. Cereb Cortex 2005;15(8):1170-7.

29. Newman SD. Frontal and parietal participation in problem solving in the Tower of London: fMRI and computational modeling of planning and high-level perception. Neuropsych 2003;41:1668-82.

30. Burgess PW. The cognitive and neuroanatomical correlates of multitasking. Neuropsychol 2000;38:848-63.

31. Feigenbaum JD, CE Polkey, RG Morris. Deficits in spatial working memory after unilateral temporal lobectomy in man. Neuropsychol 1996;34:163-76.

32. Muller ST, BL Piper. The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL test battery. J Neirosc Methods 2014;222:250-9.

33. Flores J, F. Ostrosky. Neuropsicología de lóbulos frontales, funciones ejecutivas y conducta humana. Rev Neuropsic Neuropsiq Neuroc 2008; 8(1):47-58.

34. Ardila A, F. Ostrosky. Desarrollo histórico de las funciones ejecutivas. Neuropsicología, Neuropsiquiatría y Neurociencias 2008; 8(1):1-21.

35. Bull R, KA Espy, TE Senn. A comparison of performance on the towers of London and Hanoi in young children. J Child Psych Psychiatry 2004;45(4):743-54.

36. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral Sciences. 2 ed, ed. N.J. Hillsdale1988, New York: Acad Press.

37. Syngelaki GM. Executive functioning and risky decision making in young male offenders. Crimi Just Behavior 2009;36: 1213-25.

38. Blair RJR, E. Colledge, DGV Mitchell. Somatic markers and response reversal: Is there orbitofrontal cortex dysfunction in boys with psychopathic tendencies? J Abnormal Child Psychology 2001;29:499-511.

39. Van-Goozen SHM. Executive functioning in children: A comparison of hospitalised ODD and ODD/ADHD children and normal controls. J Child Psychology Psychiatry 2004;45:284-92.

40. Paris J. Neuropsychological factors associated with borderline pathology in children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1999;38: 770-4.

41. Zelkowitz P. Diatheses and stressors in borderline pathology of childhood: The role of neuropsychological risk and trauma. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2001;40:100-5.

42. Ishikawa SS. Autonomic stress reactivity and executive functions in successful and unsuccessful criminal psychopaths from the community. J Abnorm Psychol 2001;110:423- 32.

43. Pineda D. Executive dysfunctions in children with attention deûcit hyperactivity disorder. Int J Neurosci 1998;96:177-96.

44. Diamond A. Executive functions. Ann Rev Psych 2013; 64(64):135-68.

45. Zelazo PD. The dimensional change card sort (DCCS): a method of assessing executive function in children. Nature Protocols 2003;1(1):297-301.

46. Tamnes CK. Performance monitoring in children and adolescents: a review of developmental changes in the errorrelated negativity and brain maturation. Developmental Cognitive Neurosc 2013;(6C):1-13.

47. Holroyd CB. Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex shows fMRI response to internal and external error signals. Nat Neurosc 2004;7(5): 497-8.

48. Mars RB. Neural dynamics of error processing in medial frontal cortex. Neuroimage 2005;28(4):1007-13.

49. Lie CH. Using fMRI to decompose the neural processes underlying the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Neuroimage 2006; 30(3):1038-49.

50. Zanolie K. Separable neural mechanisms contribute to feedback processing in a rule-learning task. Neuropsychologia 2008; 46(1):117-26.

51. Monchi O. Wisconsin card sorting revisited: distinct neural circuits participating in different stages of the task identified by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosc 2001;21:7733-41.

52. Tricomi E. Performance feedback drives caudate activation in a phonological learning task. J Cognitive Neurosc 2006; 18(6):1029-43.