What the CERAD Battery Can Tell Us about Executive Function as a Higher-Order Cognitive Faculty
Table 3
Standardized structural equations (factor loadings only) for observed variables under higher-order EF model (including total MMSE as EF indicator), by study cohort.
Observed variable (indicator)
EPESE cohort path weight
CERAD cohort path weights
EF (2nd order latent variable)
CP or MEM (1st order latent variable)
, proportion of variance in indicator explained by 1st and 2nd order latent variables
EF (2nd order latent variable)
CP or MEM (1st order latent variable)
, proportion of variance in indicator explained by 1st and 2nd order latent variable
Sum of 3 trials (memory)
.897
.804
.845
.715
Verbal Fluency
.538
.289
.482
.233
Boston Naming
.621
.386
.481
.231
MMSE
.793
.628
.724
.524
CP: circle
.290
.084
0.0
0.0
CP: diamond
.539
.290
.493
.243
CP: rectangle
.443
.196
.047
.002
CP: cube
.572
.327
.642
.412
Delayed Recall
.728
.529
.823
.677
Factor 2 (CP)
.808
.004
.792
.280
Factor 3 (MEM)
.980
.279
.911
1.359
.777
.720
entler-Raykov corrected coefficients are shown. Bold indicates significant () pathweight. CP: A factor (latent variable) interpreted as representing constructional praxis. MEM: A factor (latent variable) interpreted as representing memory. EF: A factor (latent variable) interpreted as representing Executive Function.
