The Effects of Frontal Lobe Lesions on Goal Achievement in the Water Jug Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with prefrontal cortex lesions are impaired on a variety of planning and problem-solving tasks. We examined the problem-solving performance of 27 patients with focal frontal lobe damage on the Water Jug task. The Water Jug task has never been used to assess problem-solving ability in neurologically impaired patients nor in functional neuroimaging studies, despite sharing structural similarities with other tasks sensitive to prefrontal cortex function, including the Tower of Hanoi, Tower of London, and Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (WCST). Our results demonstrate that the Water Jug task invokes a unique combination of problem-solving and planning strategies, allowing a more precise identification of frontal lobe lesion patients' cognitive deficits. All participants (patients and matched controls) appear to be utilizing a hill-climbing strategy that does not require sophisticated planning; however, frontal lobe lesion patients (FLLs) struggled to make required "counterintuitive moves" not predicted by this strategy and found within both solution paths. Left and bilateral FLLs were more impaired than right FLLs. Analysis of the left hemisphere brain regions encompassed by the lesions of these patients found that poor performance was linked to left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex damage. We propose that patients with left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex lesions have difficulty making a decision requiring the conceptual comparison of nonverbal stimuli, manipulation of select representations of potential solutions, and are unable to appropriately inhibit a response in keeping with the final goal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".