The largest database of trusted experimental protocols
> Physiology > Mental Process > Executive Function

Executive Function

Executive Function refers to the cognitive processes that enable individuals to plan, focus attention, remember instructions, and successfully navigate complex environments.
This encompasses mental abilities such as working memory, cognitive flexibility, and inhibitory control.
Understanding and optimizing Executive Function research protocols is crucial for advancing our knowledge of human cognition and developing interventions to support individuals with conditions affecting these vital skills.
The PubCompare.ai platform leverages AI-driven insights to help researchers identify the most effective Executive Function protocols from the literature, pre-prints, and patents, streamlining the research process and unlocking new insights to drive innovation.

Most cited protocols related to «Executive Function»

Considerations for compiling the ADNI neuropsychological battery included the following: 1. Coverage of the domains of interest (memory, executive functions, language, attention, and visuospatial abilities); 2. Adequate sampling of cognitive domains of interest in subjects who are normal or who have MCI or AD; 3. Can measure change over a 2–3 year period; 4. Avoid ceiling or floor effects; 5. Were efficient and met practical demands; 6. Were utilized in the AD Clinical Study (ADCS) MCI trial and worked well in that setting. Additionally, the tests are widely used in AD Centers (ADCs) that are required to collect a Uniform Data Set, to reduce the amount of testing needed for participants enrolled in ADNI from ADCs.
The RAVLT uses a 15-item list of unrelated words. This list is read to the participant, who is asked to recall aloud as many of the words as they can. The number of successfully recalled words is recorded. The list is then repeated, and the participant again asked to recall as many words as they can. This process is repeated for a total of 5 learning trials, resulting in 5 scores. Then the examiner reads a new list of 15 words to the participant (an interference word list), and the participant is asked to recall as many of these words as possible. The participant is then asked to recall the initial word list, and the number of words recalled is recorded. After thirty minutes of other testing, the participant is again asked to recall as many words from the initial list as they can. The two versions of the RAVLT include different versions of the initial and interference word lists.
The ADAS-Cog includes two different memory tasks. First is a word list learning task similar to but distinct from that of the RAVLT. The ADAS-Cog word list includes 10 unrelated words (rather than 15) that are printed on cards. The participant is asked to read them aloud (while in the RAVLT they are read to the participant) and to remember them. There are three learning trials (rather than five in the RAVLT). After five minutes (rather than 30) of unrelated testing, the participant is asked to recall as many words as possible from the list.
The second memory task included in the ADAS-Cog is a word recognition task. In this task, the participant is given 12 cards with words printed on them, and asked to read them aloud and to remember them. Then the target words along with 12 distractor words are shown to the participant, who is asked to indicate whether the word was one they were supposed to recall. Two scores are recorded: the number of target words correctly identified as being part of the list (i.e., true positives), and the number of distractor words correctly identified as not being part of the list (i.e., true negatives).
The three different versions of the ADAS-Cog include different lists of the 10 words for the list learning trial as well as different lists of the 12 words for the recognition task.
For logical memory, a brief fact-laden passage is read aloud once. The participant is asked to recall as many of the passage’s 25 elements as they can, and the number of elements correctly recalled is recorded. After 30–40 minutes of other cognitive testing, the participant is again asked to recall the passage, and the number of elements correctly recalled in this delay condition is recorded.
In the MMSE, 3 words are read to the participant, who is asked to repeat them. Distractor tasks are then administered, after which the participant is asked to spontaneously recall the three words. Scores of 1 point are recorded for each item correctly recalled, and 0 for each item not correctly recalled.
Publication 2012
Attention Cognition Executive Function Memory Mini Mental State Examination
The primary objective of the A4 study is to test the hypothesis that solanezumab, administered as a 400-mg intravenous infusion every 4 weeks for 168 weeks, will slow cognitive decline compared with placebo in participants with preclinical AD. This objective will be assessed using a mixed model of repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of change in the ADCS-PACC score. The specific hypothesis of the A4 study is that there will be less of a decrease in the ADCS-PACC score at the end of the treatment period for participants treated with solanezumab than for participants treated with placebo.
Based on a review of the literature for cohort studies in “normal controls” who progressed to mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer dementia, we determined that a composite measure sensitive to change in preclinical AD would likely require assessment of 3 key domains: episodic memory, executive function, and orientation. Previous studies19 (link)–21 (link) have reported evidence that both list learning and paragraph recall (measures of episodic memory) tend to decline 7 to 10 years prior to the diagnosis of MCI or Alzheimer dementia. Recent data from amyloid imaging studies25 (link)–29 (link) have reported a decline in multiple cognitive domains looking retrospectively at cognitive trajectories over 8 to 10 years prior to PET amyloid imaging22 (link)–24 (link) and prospectively over 1- to 3-year longitudinal follow-up.
Based on this review, we propose a composite of 4 measures that are well established as showing sensitivity to decline in prodromal and mild dementia, and with sufficient range to detect early decline in the preclinical stages of the disease. The ADCS-PACC includes:

The Total Recall score from the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) (0–48 words),20 (link),30 (link)

The Delayed Recall score on the Logical Memory IIa sub-test from the Wechsler Memory Scale (0–25 story units),31

The Digit Symbol Substitution Test score from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Revised (0–93 symbols),32 and

The MMSE total score (0–30 points).33 (link)

The composite score is determined from its components using an established normalization method.34 (link) Each of the 4 component change scores is divided by the baseline sample standard deviation of that component, to form standardized z scores. These z scores are summed to form the composite. Thus, a change of 1 baseline standard deviation on each component would correspond to a 4-point change on the composite. In the A4 study, the ADCS-PACC will be administered at baseline and at 24, 48, 72, 96, 120, 144, and 168 weeks, alternating between 3 test versions.
Publication 2014
Alzheimer's Disease APP protein, human Cognition Delayed Memory Diagnosis Disorders, Cognitive Executive Function Fingers Hypersensitivity Intravenous Infusion Memory, Episodic Mental Recall Mini Mental State Examination Placebos Presenile Dementia solanezumab
All ADNI CN and MCI participants were diagnostically reclassified using Jak/Bondi actuarial neuropsychological test methods [24 (link), 25 (link)] applied to their baseline data. Six neuropsychological measures from ADNI were chosen because of their routine use in assessing early cognitive manifestations of AD and administration across all three ADNI grant periods (ADNI-1, -GO, and -2). The six measures were Category Fluency and Boston Naming Test scores for the language domain, Trail-Making Test Parts A and B scores for the graphomotor speed/executive function domain, and Rey AVLT delayed recall and delayed recognition scores for the episodic memory domain. None of these cognitive measures were used in making the initial ADNI diagnostic classification. Each measure was converted to an age-corrected standard score using published normative data: Mayo Older Americans Normative Study data (n = 530; [36 ]) for the Rey AVLT and National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center normative data (n = 3,286; [37 (link), 38 (link)]) for the remaining neuropsychological measures. Participants were considered to have MCI if any one of the following three criteria were met: 1) they had an impaired score, defined as >1 SD below the age-corrected normative mean, on both measures within at least one cognitive domain (i.e., memory, language, or speed/executive function); 2) they had one impaired score, defined as >1 SD below the age-corrected normative mean, in each of the three cognitive domains sampled; or 3) they had a score on the FAQ =9 indicating dependence in three or more daily activities. This latter criterion approximated Jak, Bondi et al.’s [25 (link)] incorporation of instrumental ADL assessment to diagnosis and reflects significant study partner-rated difficulties in everyday function. If none of these criteria were met, the participant was diagnosed as CN.
Publication 2014
Cognition Executive Function Memory Memory, Episodic Mental Recall Neurobehavioral Manifestations Neuropsychological Tests
A one-hour computerized neurocognitive battery (CNB) was administered to participants using a system developed at Penn (Gur et al., 2010 (link)). The CNB consisted of 14 tests assessing 5 neurobehavioral functions: Executive-Control, Episodic Memory, Complex Cognition, Social Cognition, Sensorimotor Speed (Table 2). Except for the tests designed exclusively for measuring speed, each test provides measures of both accuracy and speed. Instructions and vocabulary for verbal stimuli were simplified from the adult CNB (Gur et al., 2010 (link)). Tests were also abbreviated based on psychometric analysis of data from other large-scale genomic studies, and the details of these analyses will be provided in separate manuscripts. The time saving allowed us to add two social cognition tests: Emotion Differentiation and Age Differentiation. A brief standardized reading test from the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT4, Wilkinson & Robertson, 2006 ) was administered first to determine participants' ability to complete the battery and to provide an estimate of IQ.
The following functional domains were assessed with the CNB using child appropriate versions of the language related tests.
Publication 2012
Adult Cognition Cognitive Testing Emotions Executive Function Genome Memory, Episodic Psychometrics

Protocol full text hidden due to copyright restrictions

Open the protocol to access the free full text link

Publication 2010
Abuse, Alcohol Cardiovascular Diseases Cognition Craniocerebral Trauma Diagnosis Education of Patients Epistropheus Executive Function Homo sapiens Leukoencephalopathy Memory Mental Disorders Metabolic Diseases Mini Mental State Examination Mood Nervous System Disorder Neuropsychological Tests Patients Radionuclide Imaging

Most recents protocols related to «Executive Function»

All patients are assessed with a ~ 1-h neuropsychological test battery, including ‘cold’ (emotion-independent) cognitive tasks indexing reaction time; psychomotor speed; verbal learning and memory; working memory; and executive functions, as well as ‘hot’ (emotion-dependent) cognitive tasks from the Danish version of the EMOTICOM test-battery indexing emotion recognition; emotion detection; and moral emotions in social situations [60 (link)].
Patients in subcohorts I-II will complete an additional ~ 1 h of testing with tasks assessing mental flexibility, verbal fluency, and visuospatial learning and memory (see Additional questionnaires for the subcohort I-II only are in bold.
Table 3 for a complete overview of all cognitive tasks). In addition, patients’ subjective experiences of cognitive disturbances will be assessed by the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) questionnaire [36 (link)].

Cognitive testing before treatment

Cognitive TestCognitive Domaine
Whole Cohort
 Simple Reaction Time task (SRT)Reaction time
 Trail Making Test A & BPsychomotor speed/executive function
 Symbol Digit Modality Task (SDMT)Psychomotor speed/working memory
 Letter-Number Sequence (LNS)Working memory
 D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test (Stroop)Executive function
 Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)Learning/memory
 EMOTICOM Emotional Recognition Task (ERT)Emotion recognition accuracy
 EMOTICOM Emotional Intensity Morphing Task (IMT)Emotion perceptual detection threshold
 EMOITCOM Moral Emotions Task (MET)Social cognition: guilt and shame
Additional testing in the subcohorts
 D-KEFS Verbal FluencyExecutive function
 Rey Complex Figure Test (RCFT)Visuo-spatial learning/memory
 Probabilistic Reversal Learning taskLearning within a feedback context
 Screen for Cognitive Impairments in Psychiatry—Depression (SCIP-D)Memory, working memory, vocabulary, psychomotor speed
Patients in subcohorts I-II will complete an additional ~ 1 h of testing with tasks assessing mental flexibility, verbal fluency, and visuospatial learning and memory (see Additional questionnaires for the subcohort I-II only are in bold.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Cognition Cognitive Testing Common Cold Disorders, Cognitive Emotions Executive Function Fingers Guilt Memory Memory, Short-Term Morphine Neuropsychological Tests Patients Recognition, Psychology
All included participants were evaluated using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Detailed cognitive assessment was available for a subsample of participants in both the Paris cohort (total n=135: CU [n=14], MCI patients [n=64], dementia patients [n=57]) and the BIODEGMAR cohort (total n=139: CU [n=18], MCI [n=59], dementia [n=62]). In the Paris cohort, memory domain scores were evaluated using total immediate and delayed recall of Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT), and the delayed matching-to-samples 48 test (DMS 48) for visual memory testing. Executive function was assessed using forward and backward digit span, frontal assessment battery and letter and animal fluencies. The language domain was evaluated using the Dénomination Orale 80 test, a naming test. In BIODEGMAR cohort, memory domain was evaluated using total immediate and delayed recall of FCSRT and the Memory Impairment Screen; executive functions, with backward digit span, TMT A and B; language domain, with the Boston naming test. Z-scores were computed from the control group scores as a reference. Domain scores were obtained by averaging z-scores of the individual tests available results within that domain and the global cognition score by averaging the 3 domains’ z-scores.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Animals Cognition Delayed Memory Executive Function Fingers Memory Memory Deficits Mental Recall Mini Mental State Examination Patients Presenile Dementia Vision Tests
Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype is expressed as a binary categorical variable, with participants classified as carriers (one or more ɛ4 alleles present) or non-carriers (no ɛ4 allele present).
As sleep may affect various aspects of cognition differently,49 we include five cognitive composite indices, reflecting the average of domain-specific standardized test scores (Z-scores) administered as part of the WRAP battery.40 (link) The cognitive composites include working memory,50 (link) immediate memory, delayed memory, executive function (EF)51 (link) and a Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite (PACC).52 (link),53 The tests contributing to each composite are shown in Supplementary Table 2.
Cognitive status is determined for each visit using a consensus review process that incorporated internal as well as published norms. A multi-disciplinary panel reviews cases to determine whether mild cognitive impairment or dementia was present.54
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Alleles Apolipoproteins E Cognition Cognitive Impairments, Mild Delayed Memory Executive Function Genotype Memory, Short-Term Presenile Dementia Sleep
We searched the UCSF Memory and Aging Center database for patients who completed the 109-item behavioural questionnaire from 2004 to 2010. Subjects underwent an evaluation as a part of research studies at the Memory and Aging Center. All patients were assessed by an interdisciplinary team of clinicians consisting of neurologists, neuropsychologists, psychiatrists and nurses. Patients underwent extensive behavioural, neuroimaging and neuropsychological assessment, and diagnostic criteria were met at the time of evaluation.14–19 (link) The neuropsychological assessment included tests for memory, language, visuospatial ability and executive function, which was previously described.20 (link) Overall functional status was assessed using the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR).21 Consent was obtained for all individuals included in the study according to the Declaration of Helsinki and has been approved by the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Committee on Human Research. We selected all patients with an Alzheimer’s disease-associated or frontotemporal dementia-spectrum diagnosis. Included participants had a clinical diagnoses of Alzheimer’s-type dementia, behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, corticobasal syndrome, mild cognitive impairment, nonfluent variant primary progressive aphasia, progressive supranuclear palsy—Richardson syndrome, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia or semantic variant primary progressive aphasia. Healthy controls were included as they provided an increased range of values, which helps create more meaningful correlations in a principal component analysis (PCA). A total of 326 participants were selected.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Aphasia, Semantic Cognitive Impairments, Mild Corticobasal Degeneration Diagnosis Executive Function Frontotemporal Dementia Homo sapiens Memory Neurologists Neuropsychological Tests Nurses Patients Presenile Dementia Primary Progressive Nonfluent Aphasia Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Psychiatrist Syndrome, Mesulam's
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) [61 (link)] is typically used as a rapid screening instrument for mild cognitive impairment. It is more sensitive than the MMSE to mild cognitive impairment [62 (link)]. It assesses different cognitive domains including attention and concentration, executive functions, memory, language, visuoconstructional skills, conceptual thinking, calculation and orientation. The test which included a combination of verbal and pen/paper based tests took approximately 5–10 min to complete. A score (out of 30) based on performance was calculated for each participant with lower scores indicating greater cognitive impairment and scores of 26 or over indicating normal cognitive functioning.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Attention Cognitive Impairments, Mild Disorders, Cognitive Executive Function Memory Mini Mental State Examination

Top products related to «Executive Function»

Sourced in United States, Austria, Japan, Cameroon, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, Belgium, Israel, Denmark, Australia, New Caledonia, France, Argentina, Sweden, Ireland, India
SAS version 9.4 is a statistical software package. It provides tools for data management, analysis, and reporting. The software is designed to help users extract insights from data and make informed decisions.
Sourced in United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Austria, Germany, Czechia, Belgium, Denmark, Canada
SPSS version 22.0 is a statistical software package developed by IBM. It is designed to analyze and manipulate data for research and business purposes. The software provides a range of statistical analysis tools and techniques, including regression analysis, hypothesis testing, and data visualization.
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Japan, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Czechia, Belgium, Sweden, New Zealand, Spain
SPSS version 25 is a statistical software package developed by IBM. It is designed to analyze and manage data, providing users with a wide range of statistical analysis tools and techniques. The software is widely used in various fields, including academia, research, and business, for data processing, analysis, and reporting purposes.
Sourced in United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium, Austria, China, Spain, Ireland
SPSS version 24 is a statistical software package developed by IBM. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for data analysis, including techniques for descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and predictive modeling. The software is designed to help users interpret data, identify trends, and make informed decisions based on statistical insights.
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, Belgium, Austria, Spain, China
SPSS 25.0 is a statistical software package developed by IBM. It provides advanced analytical capabilities for data management, analysis, and visualization. The core function of SPSS 25.0 is to enable users to conduct a wide range of statistical tests and procedures, including regression analysis, hypothesis testing, and multivariate techniques.
Sourced in United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Germany, China, Austria, Ireland, Canada, France, Spain, Switzerland
SPSS Statistics 20 is a software package for statistical analysis. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for data management, analysis, and reporting. The software is designed to handle a wide range of data types and supports a variety of statistical techniques, including regression analysis, hypothesis testing, and descriptive statistics.
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Japan, Germany
SPSS is a software package used for statistical analysis. It provides a graphical user interface and a robust set of tools for data manipulation, analysis, and visualization. SPSS is designed to handle a wide range of data types and supports a variety of statistical techniques, including regression analysis, factor analysis, and time series analysis.
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Japan, Thailand, China, Italy, Germany
SPSS version 18.0 is a statistical software package developed by IBM. It provides data management, analysis, and reporting capabilities. The core function of SPSS is to assist in the analysis of data and presentation of results.
Sourced in United States, Austria
Stata V.16 is a comprehensive statistical software package developed by StataCorp. It provides a wide range of data management, statistical analysis, and visualization tools for researchers and professionals across various fields. Stata V.16 offers a user-friendly interface and a powerful programming language to facilitate data analysis and reporting.
Sourced in United States
E-Prime is a software package for designing and running psychological experiments. It provides tools for creating, presenting, and collecting data from a variety of experiment types. E-Prime supports the integration of hardware devices and the creation of complex experimental paradigms.

More about "Executive Function"

Executive Function, also known as Cognitive Control or Supervisory Attention, refers to the higher-order mental processes that enable us to plan, focus, remember instructions, and navigate complex environments effectively.
This encompasses crucial abilities such as working memory, cognitive flexibility, and inhibitory control.
Understanding and optimizing Executive Function research protocols is crucial for advancing our knowledge of human cognition and developing interventions to support individuals with conditions affecting these vital skills.
Researchers and clinicians often utilize tools like SAS version 9.4, SPSS version 22.0, SPSS version 25, SPSS version 24, SPSS 25.0, SPSS Statistics 20, SPSS version, SPSS version 18.0, Stata V.16, and E-Prime to assess and study Executive Function.
These software packages provide a wide range of statistical analyses and experimental design capabilities to support Executive Function research.
The PubCompare.ai platform leverages AI-driven insights to help researchers identify the most effective Executive Function protocols from the literature, pre-prints, and patents, streamlining the research process and unlocking new insights to drive innovation.
By comparing and analyzing a vast corpus of relevant research, PubCompare.ai can assist researchers in locating the best protocols, optimizing their workflows, and uncovering groundbreaking discoveries in the field of Executive Function.
Whether you're interested in understanding the cognitive processes underlying decision-making, exploring the impact of Executive Function on academic or professional performance, or developing interventions to support individuals with conditions affecting these vital skills, the insights and tools provided by PubCompare.ai can be invaluable in advancing your research and driving innovation.