Effects of reward and nonreward on frustration and attention in attention deficit disorder

Abstract

The effects of reward schedule (100%, 50%, and 30%) and termination of rewards (extinction) on 30 attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity (ADD-H) and 30 normal children were studied using measures of frustration (speed/strength of lever pulling) and attention (reaction time to a light signal). ADD-Hs pulled harder on the lever than controls during extinction and on the lowest (30%) partial schedule, providing empirical evidence that they respond with greater frustration than normals when expected rewards fail to appear. The groups did not differ on the attentional measure on 100% reward. However, the partial schedules appeared to have an alerting or motivating effect on the controls, so that they responded more quickly and consistently than ADD-Hs on the partial schedules. Findings are discussed with reference to opposing theories regarding the nature of the abnormal response of ADD-Hs to reward.

The Effects of Incentives on Visual–Spatial Working Memory in Children with Attention-deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

“…In the incentive first group, the no-incentive block may be subjectively experienced as a form of punishment since children were initially rewarded for certain behaviors that they subsequently were asked to perform without reward. According to Gray (1982) and others (Corr 2002;Douglas and Parry 1994), removal of reward (i.e., extinction) is essentially equivalent to punishment. Thus, the decline in performance in children with ADHD when rewards are omitted may reflect frustration, either due to excessive sensitivity to punishment or reward, or possibly an interaction between these motivational systems postulated by Gray (Corr 2002;Gray 1982;see Quay 1988, for a discussion of motivational systems in disruptive behavior disorders).…”

“…Participants were randomly assigned to receive either the incentive or no-incentive condition first since the order in which the incentives are presented may influence performance (Corr 2002;Douglas and Parry 1994). Table 1 presents sample characteristics for each incentive order.…”

“…According to these theories, deficits in children with ADHD are expected to be ameliorated when reinforcers are powerful, frequent, and relatively immediate (Sagvolden et al 2005). In addition, children with ADHD may be particularly sensitive to the removal of rewards, resulting in a decrement in performance upon removal of reward possibly due to frustration (Douglas and Parry 1994). Thus, the question of whether motivational incentives improve working memory has both clinical and theoretical implications.…”

Children with Attention-Defecit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Peer Relationships and Peer-Oriented Interventions

“…Similarly, the generalization of the new skills to other contexts requires their reinforcement across different settings in the child' s natural environment. Several studies suggest that ADHD children are overly sensitive to the presence and removal of reinforcements (for example, Douglas and Parry, 1994;Tripp and Alsop, 1999). These studies underscore the importance of long-term reinforcement for this population; in particular, the reinforcement should work best if it is administered on a dense, consistent, and continuous schedule.…”

If-Then Plans Benefit Delay of Gratification Performance in Children With and Without ADHD

“…This impulsivity leads to several detrimental effects: Children with ADHD show risky behavior (i.e., fast driving; Jerome et al 2006), sensation seeking (Antrop et al 2000), are responsive to immediate rewards (Douglas and Parry 1994), and are less able to delay gratification or resist temptation .…”