Reaction Time and Effect of Ritalin on Children with Learning Problems

Abstract

In Exp. I, 22 poor readers and 22 normal readers of elementary-school age were matched on age, IQ, and sex and tested with a visual reaction-time task requiring same-different judgments. On initial trials poor readers were slower than normal readers. In addition, the performance of poor readers deteriorated faster than that of normal readers as testing progressed. In Exp. II, 20 hyperactive boys taking methylphenidate medication, 19 hyperactive boys whose medication was temporarily discontinued, and 19 normal boys were tested. Reaction time on early trials was not significantly different for boys in the on-medication and off-medication groups; however, both hyperactive groups were slower than the normal group. As testing progressed, reaction times of normal boys and boys taking medication remained fairly stable, while the performance of hyperactive boys not taking medication declined. The significance of these results to reading and spelling is discussed.

A Review of Stimulant Drug Research With Hyperactive Children

“…Several investigators (Kupietz ^/a/., 1976; Barkley ^/a/., 1976) have used reaction time as a measure of attention span in research with hyperactive children. Virtually every stimulant drug study that used this measure found reaction time to be significantly improved, or reduced, by stimulant drugs Cohen et al, 1971;Conners et al, 1967;Conners and Rothschild, 1968;Sprague et al, 1970;Spring et al, 1973;Sroufe et al, 1973;Sykes et al, 1972;Zahn et al, 1975), or found trends in that direction (Porges et al, 1975). Only Bradley and Bowen (1940) found no significant changes in reaction time while Campbell et al (1971) observed reaction times to increase, or become slower, while the hyperactive children were on stimulants.…”

On Resource Strategy Limitations in Hyperactivity: Cognitive Impulsivity Reconsidered

“…When both errors and reaction times are reported in a study, the error rate in the hyperactives is either too high to meet the assumptions of the process model (Sprague and Sleator, 1977) or may contain trade-off effects (Rosenthai and Allen, 1980). Others have attempted to reduce strategy effects by removing subjects with 'abnormal error rates' from the analysis (Spring et at., 1973). These considerations lead to the necessity to explore in how far performance differences between hyperactives and controls may indicate attentional process or strategy defects.…”

REACTION TIME PERFORMANCE OF BEHAVIORALLY DEVIANT CHILDREN: EFFECTS OF PRIOR PREPARATORY INTERVAL AND REINFORCEMENT*

“…However, these differences have been explained in terms of encoding speed (Spring, Greenberg, Scott and Hopwood, 1973), CNS processing time (Dykman et al, 1970) or subtle CNS insults (Stevens et al, 1967). The "normalizing" effects of reinforcement on the performance of deviant children in the current study suggests that the RT differences observed in earlier studies may have been due to differences in motivation.…”