The relationship between cognitive processing profiles according to the PASS model: Planning, attention, simultaneous and successive processes, and childhood psychopathology

The present investigation was an exploratory study designed to determine if definable cognitive profiles exist within a diverse population comprising students classified as learning disabled (LD) and emotionally disturbed (ED) as well as normal . Further results attempted to determine whether the derived profiles were related to symptom dimensions as rated by the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD). The sample of 60 children (59.6% male, 40.4% female) aged 6 to 12, were evaluated with the WISC-III in addition to a newly developed processing test, Das-Naglieri: Cognitive Assessment System (DN:CAS), that measures the four areas of planning, attention, simultaneous and successive processing. They were then grouped according to certain neuropsychological processing patterns. Factor analytic procedures combining the subtests from the WISC-III and the DN:CAS revealed four meaningful cognitive processing factors (Successive, Simultaneous/Spatial, Verbal, Planning) that were used for the clustering procedure. Cluster analytic techniques were then conducted and revealed five interpretable clusters. Subgroups were identified as High Functioning, Conduct Disorder, Low Functioning, Conceptual/Spatial Disability, Pure Nonverbal LD. Empirically derived subgroups were compared on external measures of the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD). Chi square analyses were used to determine classification, parental marital status, setting and ethnic differences. Univariate analyses of variance were applied to variables of psychopathology across cluster groups. Post-hoc Tukey-B\u27s test of pairwise comparisons were used to indicate significant differences between subgroups on the dimensions of the DSMD. Significant differences were found between subgroups on cognitive processing variables as well as on three of the pathological dimensions. The Low Functioning subgroup differed significantly from the other subgroups by its extremely poor performance on successive tasks and by its elevated scores on the Conduct, Depression and Autism scales of the DSMD. The High Functioning group was distinguished by its significantly high performance on simultaneous tasks. The Nonverbal LD group was often differentiated from the Low Functioning group on several variables related to psychopathology. Implications for assessment and intervention were discussed and can aid in more intensive and attentive remediation