The effect of habituation and changes in cognition on anxious children's performance on the WISC-IV

71 Pages·2017·1.38 MB·English

LLoouuiissiiaannaa SSttaattee UUnniivveerrssiittyy
LLSSUU DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss
LSU Master's Theses Graduate School
2014
TThhee eeffffeecctt ooff hhaabbiittuuaattiioonn aanndd cchhaannggeess iinn ccooggnniittiioonn oonn aannxxiioouuss
cchhiillddrreenn''ss ppeerrffoorrmmaannccee oonn tthhee WWIISSCC--IIVV
Franziska Noack
Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses
Part of the Psychology Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Noack, Franziska, "The effect of habituation and changes in cognition on anxious children's performance
on the WISC-IV" (2014). LSU Master's Theses. 988.
https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/988
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has
been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital
Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
THE EFFECT OF HABITUATION AND CHANGES IN COGNITION ON
ANXIOUS CHILDREN’S PERFORMANCE ON THE WISC-IV

A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
in
The Department of Psychology

by
Franziska Noack
B.S., University of Houston-Clear Lake, 2012
May 2014
To my husband Daniel NoackLeSage and my parents Ilona and Ralf Noack. Thank you for your
continuous support, kind words of encouragement, and loving patience.
------
An meinen Mann Daniel NoackLeSage und meine Eltern, Ilona und Ralf Noack. Danke für eure
grenzenlose Unterstützung, eure freundlichen Worte der Ermutigung, und euer liebevolles
Verständnis.

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my appreciation for the support and time allocated to this project by my
advisor and mentor Thompson E. Davis III, Ph.D.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................. v
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................ vi
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................... 1
1.1 Impairment, Trajectories, and Consequences.................................... 2
1.2 Anxiety Disorders.............................................................................. 5
1.3 Prevalence.......................................................................................... 8
1.4 Etiology.............................................................................................. 10
1.5 Assessment......................................................................................... 11
1.6 Theoretical Framework...................................................................... 12
1.7 Habituation and the Cognitive Model................................................ 13
1.8 Intelligence and Anxiety..................................................................... 15
1.9 Hypotheses and Rationale................................................................... 22

CHAPTER 2. METHOD....................................................................................... 25
2.1 Participants.......................................................................................... 25
2.2 Measures............................................................................................. 29
2.3 Procedures........................................................................................... 30

CHAPTER 3. RESULTS........................................................................................ 32
3.1 Power Analysis.................................................................................... 32
3.2 Preliminary Analyses........................................................................... 32
3.3 Primary Analyses................................................................................. 36

CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION.................................................................................. 42

REFERENCES........................................................................................................ 49
APPENDIX............................................................................................................. 59
IRB Approval............................................................................................... 59
VITA....................................................................................................................... 63

iv
LIST OF TABLES
1. Table 1. Demographic Information of Participants..................................... 28
2. Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations for WISC-IV Subtests.............. 36
3. Table 3. Summary of One-Way and Repeated Measures ANOVAs......... 41

v
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Figure 1. Indices and subtests of the WISC-III and WISC-IV................... 18
2. Figure 2. Participant flow chart ………..................................................... 26
3. Figure 3. Bar graph representing mean FSIQ scores of the WISC-IV
for the anxious, comorbid, and control group............................................. 37
4. Figure 4. Profile Plot Block Design and Symbol Search........................... 38
5. Figure 5. Profile Plot Digit Span and Letter-Number Sequencing............. 39
6. Figure 6. Profile Plot Block Design and Coding......................................... 40

vi
ABSTRACT
Researchers have shown that children with anxiety disorders perform worse on intelligence tests
than children with no diagnosable disorders. At this point, two theories have been put forth to
describe the direction of this relationship: anxiety results in lowered test performance, and
underlying cognitive deficits result in the development of anxiety. Lowered test performance as a
result of anxiety may either be due to attention-deficits due to state anxiety or anxiety-elicited
difficulties with long-term retention and learning. The purpose of this study was to further
examine the first theory: that clinical levels of anxiety can hamper intelligence test performance
in children with anxiety disorders due to attention-deficits in the testing situation. Although
anxious children were expected to perform worse at the beginning of testing than non-anxious
controls, this discrepancy should have diminished over time as a result of habituation. This study
drew from data collected at the Psychological Services Center at Louisiana State University as
part of the child psychoeducational testing performed there. From an overall possible sample of
259, a total of 72 children (52% male) were identified as candidates for the current study.
Subsequently, they were assigned to one of three groups based on their diagnostic profiles:
Anxious Group (n=22), Control Group (n=30), or Comorbid Group (n=20). Contrary to the
hypothesis, no differences were observed between children in the anxious, comorbid, and control
groups on FSIQ. Further, no significant improvements were seen across subtests in the anxious
group. The current findings suggest that habituation to the testing situation has no significant
effect on anxious children’s performance on IQ tests. Suggestions for future studies and
limitations are outlined in the discussion section.

vii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Anxiety disorders are defined as fear or anxiety that is persistent or excessive, often
leading the affected individual to engage in dysfunctional or maladaptive behaviors (Barlow,
2004). Whereas fear is considered the immediate physical response (e.g., increased heart rate) to
a specific stimulus, anxiety is based on the individual’s anticipation of adverse outcomes in the
future (Barlow, 2004). Although distinct, anxiety and fear often overlap to varying degrees
among the different types of disorders. One way to differentiate between the various anxiety
diagnoses is the stimuli that elicit the fear or anxiety in an individual, however many other
differences exist. But even individuals with the same anxiety diagnosis differ in the way they
experience (e.g., intensity, duration) and react to the feared stimulus. Behavioral responses to the
aversive stimulus can range from avoidance to aggression, in accordance with the familiar fight
or flight response (Cannon, 1929). The fight or flight response is a concept describing two
categories of behaviors in which a person may engage in when feeling threatened. More recent
conceptualizations have pushed towards the inclusion of the freeze and fright response into the
fight or flight model (Bracha, Ralston, & Matsukawa, 2004). Overall these behaviors are
responses to the activity of the sympathetic nervous system that may result in lower or higher
blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate. Whereas the freeze, flight, or fight responses are a
result of increased activity of the sympathetic nervous system, the fright response result in
decreased activity. According to Bracha, Ralston, and Matsukawa (2004), freeze and fright
responses may appear similar, but have different underlying mechanisms and different
evolutionary benefits. Whereas the freeze response allows for heightened awareness of the
surrounding environment, fright results in tonic immobility and may have previously increased
survival by mimicking death and allowing escape from a deceived predator (Bracha, Ralston, &
1
Matsukawa, 2004). Whether a person becomes aggressive, freezes, withdraws, or experiences
tonic immobility depends on a number of variables that are out of the scope of this paper
(Barlow, 2004; Bracha, Ralston, & Matsukawa, 2004; Cannon, 1929; Dienstbier, 1989).
Behaviors depend on the situational circumstances and the individual’s chronological and
developmental age (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Endler & Kocovski, 2001). It is
therefore important to consider developmental aspects, especially when diagnosing children,
since some fears and anxieties can be considered age-appropriate and important for cognitive
development (e.g., separation anxiety in toddlers) whereas others are considered maladaptive
(e.g., selective mutism; American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
1.1 Impairment, Trajectories, and Consequences
Anxiety disorders greatly impair children’s social and intellectual development. Anxious
children are often slower to reach age-appropriate milestones, since they avoid situations that
may otherwise foster communication and other cognitive and adaptive skills (Davis et al., 2011).
Most childhood anxiety disorders are likely to be maintained into adulthood and may increase
the likelihood of developing homotypic and/or heterotypic comorbid disorders. Whereas
developing homotypic disorders such as depression or other anxiety disorders is more common,
the development of heterotypic disorders such as externalizing disorders (i.e., attention-
deficit/hyperactivity disorder, ADHD; oppositional defiant disorder, ODD; or conduct disorder,
CD) is less common (Bittner et al., 2007). Besides the poor prognosis suggesting potential
development of comorbid disorders, childhood anxiety disorders have also been associated with
school-refusal behavior (Berg, 1992; Bernstein & Garfinkel, 1986), decreased quality of life
(Barrera & Norton, 2009), poor social skills, rejection by peers, and peer-victimization (Epkins
& Heckler, 2011).
2