Deficient interference control during working memory updating in adults with ADHD: An event-related potential study

Stroux, D.; Shushakova, Anna; Geburek-Höfer, A.J.; Ohrmann, Patricia; Rist, Fred; Pedersen, Anya

doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2015.05.021

Cited by 32 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, neuronal correlates of cognitive control and action selection mechanisms are of interest given the prominent executive function deficits in ADHD (Houghton et al, 1999; Kenemans et al, 2005; Roberts et al, 2012). Conflict monitoring abilities play a crucial role in this context (Randall et al, 2009; Cao et al, 2013; Bluschke et al, 2016b, 2017; Stroux et al, 2016) and have been suggested as an endophenotype of ADHD (Albrecht et al, 2008). Concerning subtype differences, patients with ADHD-C have been shown to be somewhat more affected by such executive control deficits (Nikolas and Nigg, 2013; Ahmadi et al, 2014; Bluschke et al, 2016a,c; Dobson-Patterson et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuronal Intra-Individual Variability Masks Response Selection Differences between ADHD Subtypes—A Need to Change Perspectives

Bluschke

Chmielewski

Mückschel

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the high intra-individual variability in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), there may be considerable bias in knowledge about altered neurophysiological processes underlying executive dysfunctions in patients with different ADHD subtypes. When aiming to establish dimensional cognitive-neurophysiological constructs representing symptoms of ADHD as suggested by the initiative for Research Domain Criteria, it is crucial to consider such processes independent of variability. We examined patients with the predominantly inattentive subtype (attention deficit disorder, ADD) and the combined subtype of ADHD (ADHD-C) in a flanker task measuring conflict control. Groups were matched for task performance. Besides using classic event-related potential (ERP) techniques and source localization, neurophysiological data was also analyzed using residue iteration decomposition (RIDE) to statistically account for intra-individual variability and S-LORETA to estimate the sources of the activations. The analysis of classic ERPs related to conflict monitoring revealed no differences between patients with ADD and ADHD-C. When individual variability was accounted for, clear differences became apparent in the RIDE C-cluster (analog to the P3 ERP-component). While patients with ADD distinguished between compatible and incompatible flanker trials early on, patients with ADHD-C seemed to employ more cognitive resources overall. These differences are reflected in inferior parietal areas. The study demonstrates differences in neuronal mechanisms related to response selection processes between ADD and ADHD-C which, according to source localization, arise from the inferior parietal cortex. Importantly, these differences could only be detected when accounting for intra-individual variability. The results imply that it is very likely that differences in neurophysiological processes between ADHD subtypes are underestimated and have not been recognized because intra-individual variability in neurophysiological data has not sufficiently been taken into account.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuronal Intra-Individual Variability Masks Response Selection Differences between ADHD Subtypes—A Need to Change Perspectives

Bluschke

Chmielewski

Mückschel

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Linden (2005) found P3 to be related to brain regions involved in attention, such as the parietal lobe, temporo-parietal junction, lateral prefrontal areas, and cingulate gyrus. Studies about ADHD (Kim et al, 2014; Stroux et al, 2016), which is often comorbid with BPD (Speranza et al, 2011), concluded that a diminished P3 amplitude could be interpreted as an inefficient allocation of attention in WM. These observations suggest that there is abnormal neural activity on allocating attention resources in BPD patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ERPs are superior to behavioral or other neuroimaging measures, the latter of which have poor temporal resolution, when seeking information about the cognitive processing stages that contribute to WM abnormalities in BPD. Among the ERP components, N2 and P3 amplitudes have been reliably associated with WM function (Kim et al, 2014; Stroux et al, 2016). As a negative component was typical elicited between 200 ms and 350 ms poststimulus, N2 reflects retrieval of memory representations and perceptual comparisons (Patel and Azzam, 2005; Folstein and Van Petten, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Event-Related Potentials Altered in Patients with Borderline Personality Disorder during Working Memory Tasks

Liu

Zhong

et al. 2017

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas some studies have demonstrated impaired working memory (WM) among patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), these findings have not been consistent. Furthermore, there is a lack of neurophysiological evidence about WM function in patients with BPD. The goal of this study was to examine WM function in patients with BPD by using event-related potentials (ERPs). An additional goal was to explore whether characteristics of BPD (i.e., impulsiveness and emotional instability) are associated with WM impairment. A modified version of the N-back task (0- and 2-back) was used to measure WM. ERPs were recorded in 22 BPD patients and 21 age-, handedness-, and sex-matched healthy controls (HCs) while they performed the WM task. The results revealed that there were no significant group differences for behavioral variables (reaction time and accuracy rate) or for latencies and amplitudes of P1 and N1 (all p > 0.05). BPD patients had lower P3 amplitudes and longer N2 latencies than HC, independent of WM load (low load: 0-back; high load: 2-back). Impulsiveness was not correlated with N2 latency or P3 amplitude, and no correlations were found between N2 latency or P3 amplitude and affect intensity scores in any WM load (all p > 0.05). In conclusion, the lower P3 amplitudes and longer N2 latencies in BPD patients suggested that they might have some dysfunction of neural activities in sub-processing in WM, while impulsiveness and negative affect might not have a close relationship with these deficits.

show abstract

“…Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders in adolescence and is associated with several deficits in executive functioning and cognitive control [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. Executive function/cognitive control is an umbrella term for processes which are necessary for goal-directed behaviour [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intact Stimulus–Response Conflict Processing in ADHD—Multilevel Evidence and Theoretical Implications

Bluschke

Mückschel

Roessner

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is closely associated with deficits in cognitive control. It seems, however, that the degree of deficits strongly depends on the examined subprocess, with the resolution of stimulus–stimulus conflicts being particularly difficult for patients with ADHD. The picture is far less clear regarding stimulus–response conflicts. The current study provides multi-level behavioural and neurophysiological data on this type of conflict monitoring in children with ADHD compared to healthy controls. To account for the potentially strong effects of intra-individual variability, electroencephalogram (EEG) signal decomposition methods were used to analyze the data. Crucially, none of the analyses (behavioural, event-related potentials, or decomposed EEG data) show any differences between the ADHD group and the control group. Bayes statistical analysis confirmed the high likelihood of the null hypothesis being true in all cases. Thus, the data provide multi-level evidence showing that conflict monitoring processes are indeed partly intact in ADHD, even when eliminating possible biasing factors such as intra-individual variability. While stimulus–stimulus conflict processing has been shown to be consistently dysfunctional in ADHD, the resolution of stimulus–response conflicts is not deficient in this patient group. In comparison to other studies, the results provide novel theoretical insights into the nature of conflict control deficits in childhood ADHD.

show abstract

Deficient interference control during working memory updating in adults with ADHD: An event-related potential study

Cited by 32 publications

References 102 publications

Neuronal Intra-Individual Variability Masks Response Selection Differences between ADHD Subtypes—A Need to Change Perspectives

Neuronal Intra-Individual Variability Masks Response Selection Differences between ADHD Subtypes—A Need to Change Perspectives

Event-Related Potentials Altered in Patients with Borderline Personality Disorder during Working Memory Tasks

Intact Stimulus–Response Conflict Processing in ADHD—Multilevel Evidence and Theoretical Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About