IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v64by2009i5p603-607.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Threat Perception in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Early Dementia

Author

Listed:
  • Julie D. Henry
  • Claire Thompson
  • Ted Ruffman
  • Felicity Leslie
  • Adrienne Withall
  • Perminder Sachdev
  • Henry Brodaty

Abstract

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia affect many aspects of emotion processing. Even though the ability to detect threat is a particularly important aspect of emotion processing, no study to date has assessed threat perception in either of these groups. The purpose of the present study was to test whether individuals with MCI (n = 38) and mild dementia (n = 34) have difficulty differentiating between faces and situations normatively judged to be either high or low in threat relative to age-matched controls (n = 34). To achieve this aim, all participants completed 2 danger rating tasks that involved viewing and rating high- and low-danger images. It was also assessed whether threat perception was related to cognitive functioning and emotion recognition. The results indicated that all 3 groups were accurately, and comparably, able to differentiate high from low-danger faces. However, the dementia group had difficulties differentiating high from low-danger situations, which reflected a bias to overattribute the level of threat posed by normatively judged nonthreatening situations. This difficulty was related to more general cognitive decline. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Julie D. Henry & Claire Thompson & Ted Ruffman & Felicity Leslie & Adrienne Withall & Perminder Sachdev & Henry Brodaty, 2009. "Threat Perception in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Early Dementia," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 64(5), pages 603-607.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:64b:y:2009:i:5:p:603-607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbp064
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:64b:y:2009:i:5:p:603-607. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.