2012 ADMISSIONS TASK Instructions This exercise tests your ability to select and evaluate relevant information and

then to summarise it concisely and critically. It also tests your ability to answer methodological and statistical questions at a level expected of a psychology graduate. Your task is twofold: 1) To read the five abstracts below and then attempt to write a short piece (250 words +/10%) to answer the following question:

What can you conclude about the construct of apathy in people with chronic neurodegenerative illness from the abstracts?

2) To answer the methodological/statistical questions at the end of the abstracts. You have one hour to complete both tasks. The short piece is worth three quarters of the total and the questions at the end are worth a quarter. In order to complete the first part of the task, we would ask you to bear the following information in mind: We do not expect you to have any detailed knowledge of this area of psychology. However, we would expect that some aspects are familiar to you as part of your undergraduate training. We do not expect you to define any unfamiliar terms. Use only the information contained in the abstracts: Do not refer to any literature or theories that you happen to know about from elsewhere. Furthermore, concentrate on the information which is there, as opposed to information which has not been included in the abstracts. Use only the information that is relevant to the question. As far as possible we expect you to use your own words and not sentences/phrases from the actual abstracts. It is advisable that you read all abstracts before you attempt to answer the question as you may find that some abstracts are clearer/more comprehensive than others. Your short piece will be judged against the following criteria: adherence to word limit; clear and grammatical writing style; appropriate use of information; critical analysis and synthesis. Please do not overlook the importance of grammatically correct writing.

Version 1

Abstract 1 (Whitfield, 1999) Apathy, broadly defined as a loss of motivation, is a recognised neuropsychiatric phenomenon widely reported in chronic illness. Its prevalence has been estimated at between 10-55%, depending on the assessment criteria used and populations studied. In this study we sought to assess the predictors of apathy in 125 people with chronic neurological illness with a pronounced motor component (Parkinsons disease, motor neuron disease and multiple sclerosis). Predictors (N = 9) related to demographic variables and illness severity indices were regressed onto the outcome variable (apathy) and produced a significant overall model. Significant individual predictors were: length of time since onset (longer time since onset, more apathy), gender (more male apathy) and symptom severity (more severe symptoms, higher level of apathy). All three of these predictors confirm the neurobiological underpinnings of apathy. Pharmacological interventions based on these findings are also discussed.

Abstract 2 (Hannah, 2002) Levels of apathy were measured and compared across 100 people with a number of different chronic neurodegenerative illnesses. Apathy was measured using two scales, both of which had received extensive validation pre-testing and all of which had the measurement of apathy as their primary purpose. Correlations between the two tests indicated a statistically significant degree of overlap between the scales (r = .33). The results of the between group comparison indicated no difference in apathy levels between the different patient groups based on diagnosis. When assessed as a whole group, significant correlations emerged between demographic variables and apathy, and both depression and anxiety correlated highly (r = .85, r = .79 respectively) with the apathy scales. The implications of these findings on current conceptualisations of apathy are discussed. Abstract 3 (Bennett, 2004) The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a modified group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention on apathy levels in people with Parkinsons disease (PD). Using randomised controlled methodology, 150 people with PD, also with a clinical indication of apathy, were randomly allocated to three groups: treatment as usual (n = 50), supportive group counselling (n = 49) and the modified CBT intervention (n = 51). Although attrition was problematic in both intervention groups, and in particular the CBT group, a significant overall interaction between treatment group and time (pre and post intervention) emerged. Post hoc pre and post intervention comparisons indicated a significant difference between both the supportive group counselling and group CBT interventions as compared with the treatment as usual control group. However, although apathy scores in the two group conditions were both reduced post intervention, no significant differences emerged in the levels of reduction between participants in the two group interventions. Implications for therapeutic interventions are discussed.

Abstract 4 (Clare, 2006) Ten people with Parkinsons disease (eight men, two women), who also had a clinical indication of apathy, were interviewed about their experiences and understanding of the apathy label. Semi structured individual interviews were carried out with each participant and data analysed. Three themes emerged: If I cant do things to the same standard I did before then I cant really be bothered: the role of pre and post illness self to self comparisons; Id rather be the one not to go golfing than for me to kicked out of the club for not being right: withdrawal as a form of control on threats to self esteem; I do wonder whether this apathy label is more about the doctors being irritated by me and my decisions not to do certain things: apathy as part of health professionals good patient schema. The implications of these findings on psychiatric concepts of apathy are discussed.

Abstract 5 (Mensah, 2009) This review addresses the utility of the label of apathy in people with dementia. Search procedures according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria revealed 35 papers. Firstly the prevalence rates reported in the studies measuring apathy levels in people with dementia were reviewed and then apathys status as a valid construct separate from depression and other psychological constructs examined. Results indicated a wide variation in reported apathy rates depending on the scale used and the sample assessed. Gender differences were also noticeable, with men scoring higher than women. Studies which had correlated apathy measures with other psychological measures indicated significant positive correlations with depression, anxiety, self-esteem and locus of control. Conclusions are made about the construct of apathy and its usefulness in describing the psychological experiences of people with dementia.

Methodological questions 1. How do you imagine the data collected as part of the study reported in abstract 1 were statistically analysed? Please justify your answer. (2 points) 2. How much variance did the two apathy scales share in abstract 2? Please justify briefly your final answer. (1 point) 3. Comment on sample size issues in abstract 3. (1 point) 4. How do you think the data reported in abstract 4 were analysed? Please justify. (2 points) 5. What type of review do you think was carried out in abstract 5? Please justify. (1 point)

ADMISSIONS TASK Instructions This exercise tests your ability to select and evaluate relevant information and then to summarise it concisely and critically. It also tests your ability to answer methodological and statistical questions at a level expected of a psychology graduate. Your task is twofold: 1) To read the five abstracts below and then attempt to write a short piece (250 words +/10%) to answer the following question:

What can you conclude about the construct of apathy in people with chronic neurodegenerative illness from the abstracts?

2) To answer the methodological/statistical questions at the end of the abstracts. You have one hour to complete both tasks. The short piece is worth three quarters of the total and the questions at the end are worth a quarter. In order to complete the first part of the task, we would ask you to bear the following information in mind: We do not expect you to have any detailed knowledge of this area of psychology. However, we would expect that some aspects are familiar to you as part of your undergraduate training. We do not expect you to define any unfamiliar terms. Use only the information contained in the abstracts: Do not refer to any literature or theories that you happen to know about from elsewhere. Furthermore, concentrate on the information which is there, as opposed to information which has not been included in the abstracts. Use only the information that is relevant to the question. As far as possible we expect you to use your own words and not sentences/phrases from the actual abstracts. It is advisable that you read all abstracts before you attempt to answer the question as you may find that some abstracts are clearer/more comprehensive than others. Your short piece will be judged against the following criteria: adherence to word limit; clear and grammatical writing style; appropriate use of information; critical analysis and synthesis. Please do not overlook the importance of grammatically correct writing.

Version 2

Abstract 1 (Whitfield, 1999) Apathy, broadly defined as a loss of motivation, is a recognised neuropsychiatric phenomenon widely reported in chronic illness. Its prevalence has been estimated at between 10-55%, depending on the assessment criteria used and populations studied. In this study we sought to assess the predictors of apathy in 125 people with chronic neurological illness with a pronounced motor component (Parkinsons disease, motor neuron disease and multiple sclerosis). Predictors (N = 9) related to demographic variables and illness severity indices were regressed onto the outcome variable (apathy) and produced a significant overall model. Significant individual predictors were: length of time since onset (longer time since onset, more apathy), gender (more male apathy) and symptom severity (more severe symptoms, higher level of apathy). All three of these predictors confirm the neurobiological underpinnings of apathy. Pharmacological interventions based on these findings are also discussed.

Abstract 2 (Hannah, 2002) Levels of apathy were measured and compared across 100 people with a number of different chronic neurodegenerative illnesses. Apathy was measured using two scales, both of which had received extensive validation pre-testing and all of which had the measurement of apathy as their primary purpose. Correlations between the two tests indicated a statistically significant degree of overlap between the scales (r = .33). The results of the between group comparison indicated no difference in apathy levels between the different patient groups based on diagnosis. When assessed as a whole group, significant correlations emerged between demographic variables and apathy, and both depression and anxiety correlated highly (r = .85, r = .79 respectively) with the apathy scales. The implications of these findings on current conceptualisations of apathy are discussed. Abstract 3 (Bennett, 2004) The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a modified group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention on apathy levels in people with Parkinsons disease (PD). Using randomised controlled methodology, 150 people with PD, also with a clinical indication of apathy, were randomly allocated to three groups: treatment as usual (n = 50), supportive group counselling (n = 49) and the modified CBT intervention (n = 51). Although attrition was problematic in both intervention groups, and in particular the CBT group, a significant overall interaction between treatment group and time (pre and post intervention) emerged. Post hoc pre and post intervention comparisons indicated a significant difference between both the supportive group counselling and group CBT interventions as compared with the treatment as usual control group. However, although apathy scores in the two group conditions were both reduced post intervention, no significant differences emerged in the levels of reduction between participants in the two group interventions. Implications for therapeutic interventions are discussed.

Abstract 4 (Clare, 2006) Ten people with Parkinsons disease (eight men, two women), who also had a clinical indication of apathy, were interviewed about their experiences and understanding of the apathy label. Semi structured individual interviews were carried out with each participant and data analysed. Three themes emerged: If I cant do things to the same standard I did before then I cant really be bothered: the role of pre and post illness self to self comparisons; Id rather be the one not to go golfing than for me to kicked out of the club for not being right: withdrawal as a form of control on threats to self esteem; I do wonder whether this apathy label is more about the doctors being irritated by me and my decisions not to do certain things: apathy as part of health professionals good patient schema. The implications of these findings on psychiatric concepts of apathy are discussed.

Abstract 5 (Mensah, 2009) This review addresses the utility of the label of apathy in people with dementia. Search procedures according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria revealed 35 papers. Firstly the prevalence rates reported in the studies measuring apathy levels in people with dementia were reviewed and then apathys status as a valid construct separate from depression and other psychological constructs examined. Results indicated a wide variation in reported apathy rates depending on the scale used and the sample assessed. Gender differences were also noticeable, with men scoring higher than women. Studies which had correlated apathy measures with other psychological measures indicated significant positive correlations with depression, anxiety, self-esteem and locus of control. Conclusions are made about the construct of apathy and its usefulness in describing the psychological experiences of people with dementia.

Methodological questions 6. How do you imagine the data collected as part of the study reported in abstract 1 were statistically analysed? Please justify your answer. (2 points) 7. How much variance did the two apathy scales share in abstract 2? Please justify briefly your final answer. (1 point) 8. Comment on sample size issues in abstract 3. (1 point) 9. How do you think the data reported in abstract 4 were analysed? Please justify. (2 points) 10. What type of review do you think was carried out in abstract 5? Please justify. (1 point)

ADMISSIONS TASK Instructions This exercise tests your ability to select and evaluate relevant information and then to summarise it concisely and critically. It also tests your ability to answer methodological and statistical questions at a level expected of a psychology graduate. Your task is twofold: 1) To read the five abstracts below and then attempt to write a short piece (250 words +/10%) to answer the following question:

What can you conclude about the construct of apathy in people with chronic neurodegenerative illness from the abstracts?

2) To answer the methodological/statistical questions at the end of the abstracts. You have one hour to complete both tasks. The short piece is worth three quarters of the total and the questions at the end are worth a quarter. In order to complete the first part of the task, we would ask you to bear the following information in mind: We do not expect you to have any detailed knowledge of this area of psychology. However, we would expect that some aspects are familiar to you as part of your undergraduate training. We do not expect you to define any unfamiliar terms. Use only the information contained in the abstracts: Do not refer to any literature or theories that you happen to know about from elsewhere. Furthermore, concentrate on the information which is there, as opposed to information which has not been included in the abstracts. Use only the information that is relevant to the question. As far as possible we expect you to use your own words and not sentences/phrases from the actual abstracts. It is advisable that you read all abstracts before you attempt to answer the question as you may find that some abstracts are clearer/more comprehensive than others. Your short piece will be judged against the following criteria: adherence to word limit; clear and grammatical writing style; appropriate use of information; critical analysis and synthesis. Please do not overlook the importance of grammatically correct writing.

Version 3

Abstract 1 (Whitfield, 1999) Apathy, broadly defined as a loss of motivation, is a recognised neuropsychiatric phenomenon widely reported in chronic illness. Its prevalence has been estimated at between 10-55%, depending on the assessment criteria used and populations studied. In this study we sought to assess the predictors of apathy in 125 people with chronic neurological illness with a pronounced motor component (Parkinsons disease, motor neuron disease and multiple sclerosis). Predictors (N = 9) related to demographic variables and illness severity indices were regressed onto the outcome variable (apathy) and produced a significant overall model. Significant individual predictors were: length of time since onset (longer time since onset, more apathy), gender (more male apathy) and symptom severity (more severe symptoms, higher level of apathy). All three of these predictors confirm the neurobiological underpinnings of apathy. Pharmacological interventions based on these findings are also discussed.

Abstract 2 (Hannah, 2002) Levels of apathy were measured and compared across 100 people with a number of different chronic neurodegenerative illnesses. Apathy was measured using two scales, both of which had received extensive validation pre-testing and all of which had the measurement of apathy as their primary purpose. Correlations between the two tests indicated a statistically significant degree of overlap between the scales (r = .33). The results of the between group comparison indicated no difference in apathy levels between the different patient groups based on diagnosis. When assessed as a whole group, significant correlations emerged between demographic variables and apathy, and both depression and anxiety correlated highly (r = .85, r = .79 respectively) with the apathy scales. The implications of these findings on current conceptualisations of apathy are discussed. Abstract 3 (Bennett, 2004) The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a modified group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention on apathy levels in people with Parkinsons disease (PD). Using randomised controlled methodology, 150 people with PD, also with a clinical indication of apathy, were randomly allocated to three groups: treatment as usual (n = 50), supportive group counselling (n = 49) and the modified CBT intervention (n = 51). Although attrition was problematic in both intervention groups, and in particular the CBT group, a significant overall interaction between treatment group and time (pre and post intervention) emerged. Post hoc pre and post intervention comparisons indicated a significant difference between both the supportive group counselling and group CBT interventions as compared with the treatment as usual control group. However, although apathy scores in the two group conditions were both reduced post intervention, no significant differences emerged in the levels of reduction between participants in the two group interventions. Implications for therapeutic interventions are discussed.

Abstract 4 (Clare, 2006) Ten people with Parkinsons disease (eight men, two women), who also had a clinical indication of apathy, were interviewed about their experiences and understanding of the apathy label. Semi structured individual interviews were carried out with each participant and data analysed. Three themes emerged: If I cant do things to the same standard I did before then I cant really be bothered: the role of pre and post illness self to self comparisons; Id rather be the one not to go golfing than for me to kicked out of the club for not being right: withdrawal as a form of control on threats to self esteem; I do wonder whether this apathy label is more about the doctors being irritated by me and my decisions not to do certain things: apathy as part of health professionals good patient schema. The implications of these findings on psychiatric concepts of apathy are discussed.

Abstract 5 (Mensah, 2009) This review addresses the utility of the label of apathy in people with dementia. Search procedures according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria revealed 35 papers. Firstly the prevalence rates reported in the studies measuring apathy levels in people with dementia were reviewed and then apathys status as a valid construct separate from depression and other psychological constructs examined. Results indicated a wide variation in reported apathy rates depending on the scale used and the sample assessed. Gender differences were also noticeable, with men scoring higher than women. Studies which had correlated apathy measures with other psychological measures indicated significant positive correlations with depression, anxiety, self-esteem and locus of control. Conclusions are made about the construct of apathy and its usefulness in describing the psychological experiences of people with dementia.

Methodological questions 11. How do you imagine the data collected as part of the study reported in abstract 1 were statistically analysed? Please justify your answer. (2 points) 12. How much variance did the two apathy scales share in abstract 2? Please justify briefly your final answer. (1 point) 13. Comment on sample size issues in abstract 3. (1 point) 14. How do you think the data reported in abstract 4 were analysed? Please justify. (2 points) 15. What type of review do you think was carried out in abstract 5? Please justify. (1 point)