On Data Limitations in Hyperactivity

Sergeant, Joseph A.; Scholten, C. A.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1985.tb01632.x

Cited by 94 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Example saccades of a boy with ADHD, a non-affected brother and a control boy on a 3-second delay trial of the memory-guided saccade task illustrating group differences for the tendency to under-versus overshoot the memorized target location Familial deficits in memory-guided saccades in ADHD lings (Leigh and Kennard 2004) 1 . This is also consistent with findings in visual search tasks of ADHD children and controls (Sergeant and Scholten 1985).…”

Section: Visuo-spatial Working Memorysupporting

confidence: 81%

Deficits in visuo-spatial working memory, inhibition and oculomotor control in boys with ADHD and their non-affected brothers

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. Few studies have assessed visuo-spatial working memory and inhibition in attention-deficit=hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by recording saccades and consequently little additional knowledge has been gathered on oculomotor functioning in ADHD. Moreover, this is the first study to report the performance of non-affected siblings of children with ADHD, which may shed light on the familiality of deficits. A total of 14 boys with ADHD, 18 non-affected brothers, and 15 control boys aged 7-14 years, were administered a memory-guided saccade task with delays of three and seven seconds. Familial deficits were found in accuracy of visuospatial working memory, percentage of anticipatory saccades, and tendency to overshoot saccades relative to controls. These findings suggest memory-guided saccade deficits may relate to a familial predisposition for ADHD.

show abstract

Section: Visuo-spatial Working Memorysupporting

confidence: 81%

Deficits in visuo-spatial working memory, inhibition and oculomotor control in boys with ADHD and their non-affected brothers

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research has revealed that this dysfunction originates in the processing stage involved in generating motor responses (Sergeant, 2005;Sergeant and Scholten, 1985). Event-rate (i.e., the speed at which stimuli are presented) varies the rate at which motor responses are required, making it an appropriate manipulation of energetic state (Sanders, 1983).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Event-rate effects in the flanker task: ERPs and task performance in children with and without AD/HD

Johnstone

Galletta

2013

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Demanding tasks require a greater amount of effort, in which case individuals are required to alter their energetic-state to a level appropriate to perform the task. According to the Cognitive-Energetic Model (CEM), children with AD/HD are unable to effectively modulate their energetic state, leading to task underperformance. Using an Eriksen flanker task with varying event-rates, the current study compared the ability of typically-developing children and children with AD/HD to modulate their energetic state. In line with the CEM, it was predicted that children with AD/HD would underperform in the fast and slow eventrates. Results indicated that the groups did not differ in commission errors (i.e., incorrect responses). However, children with AD/HD made more omission errors to incongruent stimuli at the fast and slow eventrates, compared to controls. N2 amplitude was significantly larger for the AD/HD than control group in the slow event-rate. It is concluded that the energetic state modulation dysfunction in children with AD/HD results in an inability to attend to the task, as opposed to an inability to perform the task itself. Furthermore, these task performance differences did not manifest in either the N2 or P3 ERP components. Therefore, inattention in children with AD/HD may have its locus in response preparation, as opposed to stimulus processing, but more research is required to validate these conjectures. Abstract: Demanding tasks require a greater amount of effort, in which case individuals are required to alter their energetic-state to a level appropriate to perform the task. According to the CognitiveEnergetic Model (CEM), children with AD/HD are unable to effectively modulate their energetic state, leading to task underperformance. Using an Eriksen flanker task with varying event-rates, the current study compared the ability of typically-developing children and children with AD/HD to modulate their energetic state. In line with the CEM, it was predicted that children with AD/HD would underperform in the fast and slow event-rates. Results indicated that the groups did not differ in commission errors (i.e., incorrect responses). However, children with AD/HD made more omission errors (i.e., impulsively early or non-responses) to incongruent stimuli at the fast and slow event-rates, compared to controls. N2 amplitude was significantly larger for the AD/HD than control group in the slow event-rate. It is concluded that the energetic state modulation dysfunction in children with AD/HD results in an inability to attend to the task, as opposed to an inability to perform the task itself. Furthermore, these task performance differences did not manifest in either the N2 or P3 ERP components. Therefore, inattention in children with AD/HD may have its locus in response preparation, as opposed to stimulus processing, but more research is required to validate these conjectures. Highlights Children with AD/HD unable to effectively modulate energetic state  Event-rate varied during interference control in c...

show abstract

“…It has been previously demonstrated that ADHD patients (and impulsive adults) might trade accuracy for speed (Barkley 1990;Dickman and Meyer 1988;Sergeant and Scholten 1985;Sonuga-Barke et al 1996). Strictly speaking, such results do not indicate a process deficit in ADHD patients, but may reflect difficulties in the maintenance of an effective response set, aversion to delay, deficits in response inhibition, or differences in speed accuracy trade-off (Sonuga-Barke 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Are Motor Inhibition and Cognitive Flexibility Dead Ends in ADHD?

Rommelse

Altink

Sonneville

et al. 2007

J Abnorm Child Psychol

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive dysfunction has been postulated as the core deficit in ADHD, although many deficits in lower order cognitive processes have also been identified. By obtaining an appropriate baseline of lower order cognitive functioning light may be shed on as to whether executive deficits result from problems in lower order and/or higher order cognitive processes. We examined motor inhibition and cognitive flexibility in relation to a baseline measure in 816 children from ADHD and control families. Multiple children in a family were tested in order to examine the familiality of the measures. No evidence was found for deficits in motor inhibition or cognitive flexibility in children with ADHD or their nonaffected siblings: Compared to their baseline speed and accuracy of responding, children with ADHD and their (non)affected siblings were not disproportionally slower or inaccurate when demands for motor inhibition or cognitive flexibility were added to the task. However, children with ADHD and their (non)affected siblings were overall less accurate than controls, which could not be attributed to differences in response speed. This suggests that inaccuracy of responding is characteristic of children having (a familial risk for) ADHD. Motor inhibition and cognitive flexibility as operationalized with mean reaction time were found to be familial. It is concluded that poorer performance on executive tasks in children with ADHD and their (non)affected siblings may result from deficiencies in lower order cognitive processes and not (only) from higher order cognitive processes/executive functions.Keywords Inhibition . Set shifting . Endophenotype . Affected and nonaffected siblings . Familiality Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (American Psychiatric Association [APA] 1994) is associated with impairments in the fronto-striatal-basal ganglia neurocircuitry (Casey et al. 1997;Dickstein et al. 2005;Durston et al. 2003;Giedd et al. 2001). These impairments are hypothesized to be (causally) related to deficits in higher order cognitive processes/executive functions (Barkley 1997;Casey et al. 1997;Fuster 2002;Lovejoy et al. 1999;Mehta et al. 2004;Rubia et al. 1999). Executive deficits in working memory, (motor) inhibition, cognitive flexibility and planning are frequently found in children, adolescents and adults with ADHD (Barkley 1997;Boonstra et al. 2005b;Pennington and Ozonoff 1996;Sergeant et al. 2003;Sergeant et al. 2002;Willcutt et al. 2005). As the term 'higher order cognitive processes' suggests, there are also lower order cognitive processes on which higher order cognitive processes build (Halperin and Schulz 2006;Sergeant 2000;Sergeant et al. 2003;Shallice et al. 1996). Lower order cognitive processes, such as encoding, search, decision and response organization are less complex than higher order cognitive processes (Domin 1999;Parisi 1997;Sergeant 2000) and form necessary components for higher order cognitive operations (Baddeley and Della Sala J Abnorm Child Psychol (2007) 35:957-967

show abstract

On Data Limitations in Hyperactivity

Cited by 94 publications

References 39 publications

Deficits in visuo-spatial working memory, inhibition and oculomotor control in boys with ADHD and their non-affected brothers

Deficits in visuo-spatial working memory, inhibition and oculomotor control in boys with ADHD and their non-affected brothers

Event-rate effects in the flanker task: ERPs and task performance in children with and without AD/HD

Are Motor Inhibition and Cognitive Flexibility Dead Ends in ADHD?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About