Contextualizing racial differences in baseline neuropsychological assessment of collegiate athletes.

IF 3 4区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
McKenna S Sakamoto, Garrett A Thomas, Megan L Bradson, Breanna J Becnel, Celeste A Santivasci, Peter A Arnett
{"title":"Contextualizing racial differences in baseline neuropsychological assessment of collegiate athletes.","authors":"McKenna S Sakamoto, Garrett A Thomas, Megan L Bradson, Breanna J Becnel, Celeste A Santivasci, Peter A Arnett","doi":"10.1017/S135561772610201X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Few studies have examined the relationship between racial identity and baseline assessment performance in collegiate athletes, and even fewer have contextualized results using structural factors linked to test performance. This study examined racial differences in baseline assessment performance before and after controlling for performance on a word-reading task as a proxy for education quality. We hypothesized that there would be racial differences in baseline performance but that controlling for education quality would reduce these differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this observational cross-sectional study, 875 collegiate athletes were grouped based on racial identity (White = 661, Black = 165, Another Race = 49) and underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Cognitive composite scores and intraindividual variability (IIV) were calculated for two neurocognitive domains: attention/processing speed and memory. Education quality was assessed with the Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR). ANCOVAs were used to examine racial differences in these cognitive domains before and after controlling for WTAR scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant racial differences in both composite scores and in attention/processing speed IIV, <i>p's</i> < .001, <i>f</i> = 0.13-0.21. However, there were no significant racial differences in memory IIV, <i>p</i> = .97. After controlling for WTAR scores, there were no significant racial differences in the attention/processing (<i>p</i> = .530, <i>f</i> = 0.03) or memory (<i>p</i> = .183, <i>f</i> = 0.06) composite scores, and the relationship between racial identity and attention/processing speed IIV was less prominent (<i>p</i> = .014, <i>f</i> = 0.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results suggest that racial differences at baseline assessment can be largely accounted for by education quality as assessed by the WTAR, which underscores the importance of considering sociocultural context when assessing racially diverse athletes.</p>","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":" ","pages":"311-319"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S135561772610201X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Few studies have examined the relationship between racial identity and baseline assessment performance in collegiate athletes, and even fewer have contextualized results using structural factors linked to test performance. This study examined racial differences in baseline assessment performance before and after controlling for performance on a word-reading task as a proxy for education quality. We hypothesized that there would be racial differences in baseline performance but that controlling for education quality would reduce these differences.

Methods: For this observational cross-sectional study, 875 collegiate athletes were grouped based on racial identity (White = 661, Black = 165, Another Race = 49) and underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Cognitive composite scores and intraindividual variability (IIV) were calculated for two neurocognitive domains: attention/processing speed and memory. Education quality was assessed with the Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR). ANCOVAs were used to examine racial differences in these cognitive domains before and after controlling for WTAR scores.

Results: There were significant racial differences in both composite scores and in attention/processing speed IIV, p's < .001, f = 0.13-0.21. However, there were no significant racial differences in memory IIV, p = .97. After controlling for WTAR scores, there were no significant racial differences in the attention/processing (p = .530, f = 0.03) or memory (p = .183, f = 0.06) composite scores, and the relationship between racial identity and attention/processing speed IIV was less prominent (p = .014, f = 0.10).

Conclusions: Results suggest that racial differences at baseline assessment can be largely accounted for by education quality as assessed by the WTAR, which underscores the importance of considering sociocultural context when assessing racially diverse athletes.

大学运动员基线神经心理评估的背景化种族差异。
目的:很少有研究考察了大学运动员的种族认同与基线评估成绩之间的关系,甚至更少的研究使用与测试成绩相关的结构因素进行情境化的结果。本研究考察了在控制单词阅读任务的表现作为教育质量的代理之前和之后的基线评估表现的种族差异。我们假设在基线表现上存在种族差异,但控制教育质量会减少这些差异。方法:在这项观察性横断面研究中,875名大学运动员根据种族身份(白人= 661,黑人= 165,其他种族= 49)进行了分组,并进行了全面的神经心理学测试。计算了两个神经认知领域:注意/处理速度和记忆的认知综合得分和个体变异(IIV)。采用韦氏成人阅读测验(WTAR)评价教育质量。在控制WTAR分数之前和之后,使用ANCOVAs来检查这些认知领域的种族差异。结果:在综合得分和注意/加工速度ⅱ方面存在显著的种族差异,p < 0.001, f = 0.13 ~ 0.21。然而,在记忆iv方面没有显著的种族差异,p = 0.97。在控制WTAR得分后,注意/加工(p = .530, f = 0.03)和记忆(p = .183, f = 0.06)综合得分的种族差异不显著,种族认同与注意/加工速度iv的关系不显著(p = .014, f = 0.10)。结论:结果表明,基线评估中的种族差异在很大程度上可以通过WTAR评估的教育质量来解释,这强调了在评估种族多元化运动员时考虑社会文化背景的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
185
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate. To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书