“…Both K-ABC subtests have been found to correlate highly with other tests of working memory, for example, the WISC-R Arithmetic (.65) and Digit Span (.63) tests (e.g., Boivin et al, 2010;Meesters, Van Gastel, Ghys, & Merckelbach, 1998), and they have been proven to be sensitive to revealing the cognitive sequelae of learning disability (e.g., ADHD, MD) and neuropathology (e.g., mild traumatic brain injury; Aunola, Leskinen, Lerkkanen, & Nurmi, 2004;Fox & Fox, 2001;Frencham, Fox, & Maybery, 2003;Knauss, Stavrinos, Pendleton, de Jong, & Schwebel, 2009;Shum, Neulinger, O'Callaghan, & Mohay, 2008;Smyth & Pendleton, 1989). HM may be even more sensitive than other, more "standard" tests (e.g., the Knox test) to predict working memory deficits in these populations (as suggested by e.g., Barry & Riley, 1987;Brooker, 1997;Fox & Fox, 2001;Frencham et al, 2003). Also, the value of the K-ABC subtests has been repeatedly demonstrated while finding support for the role of working memory in time estimation or TR in, for example, healthy individuals (e.g., Brocki & Bohlin, 2004;Zélanti & Droit-Volet, 2011).…”