Top-down and bottom-up contributions to memory performance in OCD: A multilevel meta-analysis with clinical implications.

Despite extensive coverage of a relationship between memory performance and executive function in the obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) literature, the relative contributions of specific aspects of executive control have remained elusive. We, therefore, extend our previous multilevel meta-analysis (Persson et al., 2021), where demand on executive function was the most significant determinant of memory deficits in OCD, and provide a finer-grained analysis of executive control via a segregation into top-down (attentional control, maintenance and updating, planning) and bottom-up (perceptual integration, perceptual salience) contributions. Our multilevel meta-analytic approach allowed us to accommodate the interdependency of 255 effect sizes from 131 studies, totaling 4,101 OCD patients. Results revealed that maintenance and updating (top-down) and perceptual integration (bottom-up) predicted memory performance generally, and specifically in those with clinical OCD. Exploratory analyses suggested that this effect may be somewhat different among subclinical OCD groups; however, these findings should be considered with conceptual and analytical caveats in mind. We explain these results via deficient sensory (perceptual integration) and working memory (maintenance and updating) gating mechanisms and propose a model to accommodate their expression in OC symptoms. In conclusion, our meta-analysis has expanded understanding of cognitive performance in OCD and identifies the possibility of untapped cognitive targets for intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Linking Cognitive Measures of Response Inhibition and Reward Sensitivity to Trait Impulsivity.

Impulsivity is regarded as a multifaceted construct that comprises two dimensions: rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity. It is unclear, however, which aspects of trait impulsivity, as assessed by self-report measures are related to rapid-response impulsivity and/or to reward-delay impulsivity, as different results have been reported in studies using both self-report and cognitive measures. This study aimed to directly relate self-report measures of impulsivity to cognitive measures of impulsivity in individuals at low- or high-levels on two impulsivity dimensions, specifically rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity. Participants were classified into high- or low-impulsivity groups based on (1) level of rapid-response impulsivity (determined by BIS-11 Motor subscale scores); (2) level of reward-delay impulsivity (determined by BIS/BAS subscale scores); and (3) a combination of rapid-response impulsivity and reward-delay impulsivity levels. Impulsivity was assessed using Go/No-Go, Stop-Signal and Delay-Discounting tasks and self-report measures. The high rapid-response impulsivity group showed significantly higher reward-delay impulsivity on both, the Delay-Discounting tasks and on self-report measures assessing reward-delay impulsivity, than the low-risk group. Based on the level of reward-delay impulsivity, the high reward-delay impulsivity group scored significantly higher on task-based (cognitive) and self-report measures assessing rapid-response inhibition than the low reward-delay impulsivity group. Combining both dimensions of impulsivity showed that the high-impulsivity group performed significantly worse in rapid-response paradigms and temporally discounted significantly more impulsively than the low-impulsivity group. Thus, combined impulsivity factors provide better assessment of impulsivity than each dimension alone. In conclusion, robust differences in impulsivity can be identified in non-clinical young adults.