Planning of everyday tasks was examined in 48 inpatients with schizophrenia and 26 healthy controls. Participants were administered the Naturalistic Action Test, which requires completion of three everyday tasks (e.g., make toast and coffee). Planning variables, including planning behaviours (e.g., gathering items before engaging in a subtask) and planning time (e.g., period between task instructions and first action) were coded to evaluate forward thinking in these tasks. Results showed that planning variables were reliably coded. Controls demonstrated more planning behaviours than participants with schizophrenia; however, this difference was accounted for by education. People with schizophrenia spent significantly less time planning when planning time was analysed as a proportion of the total time on tasks. Planning variables were related to the ability to accomplish everyday task steps and to perform everyday task steps accurately. Together these findings suggest that rehabilitation strategies that emphasise both planning time and planning behaviours may facilitate everyday functioning in people with schizophrenia.

Abstract This study evaluated the impact of distractor objects and their similarity to target objects on everyday task performance in dementia. Twenty participants with dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (n = 12) or subcortical vascular disease (n = 8) were videotaped while they performed 3 discrete tasks: (1) make a cup of coffee, (2) wrap a gift, and (3) pack a lunch under two conditions that were counterbalanced across participants. The conditions differed in terms of the type of distractor objects included in the workspace: (1) Target-Related Distractor Condition - distractor objects were functionally and visually similar to target objects (e.g., salt for sugar) (2) Unrelated Distractor Condition - distractors were neither visually nor functionally similar to targets (e.g., glue for sugar). Participants touched (t = 4.19; p < .01) and used (z = 3.00; p < .01) significantly more distractors, made more distractor errors (i.e., substitutions; t = 2.93; p < .01), and took longer to complete tasks (t = 2.27; p < .05) in the Target-Related Distractor condition. The percent of steps accomplished and non-distractor errors did not differ across conditions (t < 1.26; p > .05 for both). In summary, distractors that were similar to targets elicited significant interference effects circumscribed to object selection. (JINS, 2010, 16, 484–494.)

Objectives: This study examines the effects of objective (level of engagement) and subjective (discrepancy between importance of work and the degree to which work needs are met) indicators of employment on self-reported psychological well-being, quality of life (QoL), and depression for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Community-based research and training center. Participants: 317 individuals with self-reported TBI under the age of 65 were included in analysis. Main Outcome Measures: Living Life After Traumatic Brain Injury (LLATBI; 1998), Flanagan Scale of Needs (J. C. Flanagan, 1982), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II; A. T. Beck, R. Steer, & G. Brown, 1996). Results: Only 21% of the present sample experienced similar levels of pre- and postinjury employment. Multiple regressions revealed significant relationships between demographic, objective, and subjective employment indicators and perceived QoL and depression. In addition, significant increments in QoL and depression variance were accounted for by subjective indicators of employment per se. Conclusions: Subjective indicators are additional important measures when assessing the rehabilitation needs and planning treatment for individuals with TBI, as they contribute to further improvements in their QoL and mood.

Objective: To examine the differential effect of objective and subjective indicators of employment on psychologic well-being, quality of life (QOL), and depression following traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design: Quasi-experimental. Setting: Research and training center on TBI interventions, in a school of medicine, in New York City. Participants: 437 individuals with TBI (age range, 18−65y) living in the community independently. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Bigelow’s Psychological Well-Being Scale, Life−3, and Beck Depression Inventory−II. The objective indicator of employment included level of employment (no employment, part-time, full-time) and the subjective indicator included work discrepancy, which was defined as the discrepancy between the perceived importance of work and the degree to which work needs are met. Results: A substantial percentage of subjects with TBI reported large negative changes in level of employment. Psychologic well-being was not significantly related to any predictor variables. QOL was significantly related to level of employment level (.15), work discrepancy (−.29), and income (.23). Depression was significantly related to education (−.10), income (−.14), level of employment (−.17), and work discrepancy (.19). Hierarchical multiple regression showed that work discrepancy contributed significantly to QOL and depression variance above and beyond all other predictors. Conclusions: The results of this study highlight the importance of including subjective indicators of employment when assessing QOL and depression in persons with TBI. The benefits of TBI rehabilitation could be optimized when traditional goals of rehabilitation (ie, return to work) are combined with more subjective and personally meaningful goals. Understanding the importance ascribed to work and identifying appropriate ways to help people fulfill their employment needs is likely to contribute further to QOL and improved mood.