↓ Skip to main content

Can Word Puzzles be Tailored to Improve Different Dimensions of Verbal Fluency? A Report of an Intervention Study

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Psychology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can Word Puzzles be Tailored to Improve Different Dimensions of Verbal Fluency? A Report of an Intervention Study
Published in
The Journal of Psychology, May 2016
DOI 10.1080/00223980.2016.1182887
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mike Murphy, Katie Spillane, James Cully, Esperanza Navarro-Pardo, Carmen Moret-Tatay

Abstract

Verbal fluency is commonly used as a proxy measure of executive functioning, as it involves cognitive flexibility, working memory, and inhibitory control. Previous research has demonstrated that crosswords can be a useful means of improving verbal fluency, results consistent with the cognitive reserve hypothesis; the form of verbal fluency affected has, however, differed across studies. The present study sought to assess the extent to which it was possible to target phonemic (PVF) and semantic verbal fluency (SVF) separately through word puzzles designed to focus on semantic/thematic and structural clues respectively. Fifty-three university students were randomly assigned to one of three groups: semantic/thematic, structural, or a daily diary control group. They were assessed on PVF and SVF at baseline, and immediately following a four-week intervention. Age, sex, and depression scores were controlled for. A 2 × 3 mixed ANCOVA showed that the structural group improved significantly more in PVF during the intervention period than did the semantic/thematic or control groups, with the improvement linked to improved switching performance. The effect size was large. No significant difference in improvement in SVF emerged, although the effect size was moderate. The findings support the notion that it is possible to improve specific forms of verbal fluency through tailored brief word-puzzle interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 21 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 25%
Social Sciences 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 24 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,463,662
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Psychology
#555
of 647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,933
of 335,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Psychology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.