Preface

Schrank, Fredrick A.; Flanagan, Dawn P.

doi:10.1016/b978-012628982-4/50000-3

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research has shown that children with the inattentive subtype of ADHD tend to exhibit negatively biased self-perceptions (Owens, & Hoza, 2003), and research has yet to examine how cognitive deficits may be implicated in the negative bias of children with the inattentive subtype of ADHD. Second, though we used a measure of cognitive deficits that is well validated and has been found to differentiate children with ADHD from children without ADHD (Schrank & Flanagan, 2003; Woodcock, et al, 2001), results should be replicated using other measures of cognitive functioning. Third, our data are cross sectional.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though a range of cognitive abilities can be assessed, in the present study only the Executive Processes, Cognitive Fluency, Broad Attention and Working Memory cluster scores were used. These cognitive abilities were examined because the cluster score or individual subtests that comprise the cluster score have been found to differentiate children with and without ADHD (Ford, Floyd, Keith, Fields, & Schrank, 2003; Schrank & Flanagan, 2003). The Executive Processes, Broad Attention, and Working Memory clusters all tap aspects of executive functioning and the Cognitive Fluency score assesses fluency and speed of performance (Mather & Woodcock, 2001).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cognitive Deficits and Positively Biased Self-Perceptions in Children with ADHD

McQuade

Tomb

Hoza

et al. 2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the relation between cognitive deficits and positive bias in a sample of 272 children with and without Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD; 7–12 years old). Results indicated that children with ADHD with and without biased self-perceptions exhibit differences in specific cognitive deficits (executive processes, working memory, broad attention, and cognitive fluency) compared to each other and to control children. Further, specific cognitive deficits emerged as partial mediators of the relation between ADHD diagnostic status and positive bias. Interestingly, some differences in results emerged based on the domain considered (academic, social, behavioral competence). Results lend initial support to the role of cognitive deficits in the positive bias of some children with ADHD. Implications for future research and intervention are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Deficits and Positively Biased Self-Perceptions in Children with ADHD

McQuade

Tomb

Hoza

et al. 2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many well-standardized, reliable, and valid measures from which to choose (Sattler, 2008). According to Schrank and Flanagan (2003), the most commonly administered measure of adult cognitive ability at the time of the present study’s data collection was the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–3rd Edition (WAIS-III; Psychological Corporation, 1997), and a commonly used assessment of achievement in adults is the Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-Ach; Mather & Woodcock, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The practice of comparing scores on measures normed on different samples, such as with the WAIS-III and WJ-Ach, although not advisable, is widely practiced (Sattler, 2008). Schrank and Flanagan (2003) suggest that the convention of using the WAIS-III and the WJ-Ach together could be the result of tradition or preference, among other factors. A more questionable practice is the use of an age-normed measure of cognitive ability and a grade-normed measure of achievement, as one is comparing scores derived from different underlying distributions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the authors of the WJ-III advance an argument in favor of using grade norms in educational settings, there are several arguments against their use beyond the possible overidentification of learning disabilities suggested by Giovingo and colleagues (2005). Schrank and Flanagan (2003) suggest that the use of any grade-based norm system is inherently unsound as norms for grades are of uneven metrics and are incredibly variable across ages. Furthermore, some state guidelines specify that age norms must be used when interpreting ability level and achievement level for special education programs (Schrank, Flanagan, Woodcock, & Mascolo, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Grade Norms in College Students

Cressman

Liljequist

2012

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement grade norms versus age norms were examined in the calculation of discrepancy scores in 202 college students. Difference scores were calculated between the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-3rd Edition Full Scale IQ and the Woodcock-Johnson III Total Achievement, Broad Reading, Math, and Written Language scores. The proportion meeting the substantial discrepancy criterion of two standard deviations plus or minus the standard error of the difference between means was 7.9% using age norms and 37.6% using grade norms. Using mixed analyses of variance, the authors found main effects for type of norm for all difference scores, with grade norms yielding significantly higher difference scores than age norms. A main effect for student status (traditional-age students n = 124, non-traditional-age students n = 78) was found for Total Achievement, Broad Reading, and Math such that traditional-age students had greater discrepancies. Discrepancy scores are contrasted with absolute scores (SS < 85) in the identification of learning disabilities as well. Implications of using grade versus age norms are discussed.

show abstract

Cochlear Implantation and Educational and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Adolescence

Barker

Petruzzello

Sarangoulis

et al. 2023

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceCochlear implants (CIs) have been shown to be effective in improving auditory skills and speech and language development. However, less is known about the long-term outcomes of CIs on educational functioning or quality of life.ObjectiveTo evaluate long-term educational outcomes and quality of life in adolescents over 13 years postimplantation.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis longitudinal cohort study included 188 children with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss with CIs from the Childhood Development After Cochlear Implantation (CDaCI) study from hospital-based CI programs; a cohort of 340 children with severe to profound hearing loss without CIs from a nationally representative survey (National Longitudinal Transition Study-2; NLTS-2), and results from the literature of comparable children without CIs.Exposure(s)Cochlear implantation (early and late).Main Outcomes and MeasuresAdolescent performance on measures of academic achievement (Woodcock Johnson), language (Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language), and quality of life (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, Youth Quality of Life Instrument–Deaf and Hard of Hearing ).ResultsThe CDaCI cohort included 188 children, 136 of whom completed the wave 3 postimplantation follow-up visits (77 [55%] female) with CIs; mean [SD] age was 11.47 [1.27] years. The NLTS-2 cohort included 340 children (50% female) with severe to profound hearing loss without CIs. Children with CIs had better academic performance compared with children without CIs with similar levels of hearing loss. The largest benefits were seen for children who received implants early (prior to age 18 months), who performed at or above age and gender norms for language and academic achievement. Similarly, adolescents with CIs reported better quality of life on the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory compared with children without CIs. On a condition-specific measure (Youth Quality of Life Instrument–Deaf and Hard of Hearing), children who received implants early scored higher across all 3 domains than comparisons without CIs.Conclusions and RelevanceTo our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate long-term educational outcomes and quality of life in adolescents using CIs. This longitudinal cohort study showed better outcomes of CIs in terms of language, academic performance, and quality of life. While the greatest benefits were observed for children who received implants before age 18 months, benefits were also noted for children who received implants later, providing evidence that children with severe to profound hearing loss with CIs can achieve at or above expected levels compared with hearing peers.

show abstract

Preface

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Cognitive Deficits and Positively Biased Self-Perceptions in Children with ADHD

Cognitive Deficits and Positively Biased Self-Perceptions in Children with ADHD

The Effect of Grade Norms in College Students

Cochlear Implantation and Educational and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Adolescence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About