2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0001-6918(00)00019-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mean response times, variability, and skew in the responding of ADHD children: a response time distributional approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

72
625
6
5

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 528 publications
(708 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
72
625
6
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Research on functional endophenotypes might therefore aid a more thorough understanding of a disorder, thereby improving current therapeutic options. Behavioral data showed that ADHD patients performed worse than healthy controls as indicated by the number of commission errors after primers and distractors, number of omission errors, reaction time in Go-trials, and the variability of the reaction time, which is in line with previous findings (eg, Epstein et al, 1998;Leth-Steensen et al, 2000). These findings imply that ADHD patients are less sensitive to stimulus features, that is, to the difference between targets and non-targets, than their normal counterparts (for a meta-analysis see reference Losier et al, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Research on functional endophenotypes might therefore aid a more thorough understanding of a disorder, thereby improving current therapeutic options. Behavioral data showed that ADHD patients performed worse than healthy controls as indicated by the number of commission errors after primers and distractors, number of omission errors, reaction time in Go-trials, and the variability of the reaction time, which is in line with previous findings (eg, Epstein et al, 1998;Leth-Steensen et al, 2000). These findings imply that ADHD patients are less sensitive to stimulus features, that is, to the difference between targets and non-targets, than their normal counterparts (for a meta-analysis see reference Losier et al, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…For example, ADHD participants typically show more withinsubject variability in their reaction times (Leth-Steensen et al, 2000;Lijffijt et al, 2005;Castellanos et al, 2005). Although DA modulates the overall reaction time in our models (by modulating Go vs NoGo pathways in the striatum; Frank, 2005), it is not immediately evident how low levels of DA would lead to more variability in RTs across trials (but see General Discussion for alternative accounts).…”
Section: Noradrenaline Dysfunction In Adhdmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In particular, a high tonic/low phasic NA state in ADHD would lead to noisier frontal cortical representations, which could cause variability in reaction times, via effects in pre/motor areas. Indeed, various studies show that ADHD participants show increased within-subject reaction time variability (Leth-Steensen et al, 2000;Lijffijt et al, 2005;Castellanos et al, 2005). Interestingly, the same NA mechanism also predicts that noise in frontal motor representations may cause erratic exploratory behavior, or in other words, reduced consistency of choice responses.…”
Section: Noradrenalinementioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Children with ADHD also had more excessively long RTs shown by the higher τ values. Larger τ values are likely a consequence of attention lapses and greater trial-by-trial variability, which generally describes children with ADHD (e.g., Karalunas & Huang-Pollock, 2013;Leth-Steensen et al, 2000). Higher variability in performance may be due to a difficulty in allocating sufficient effort to maintain task ERP CORRELATES OF CONFLICT PROCESSING IN ADHD 26 performance (see also van Mourik et al, 2011), which is related to the suboptimal energetic regulation in ADHD (Sergeant, 2005).…”
Section: Behavioral Findingsmentioning
confidence: 99%