The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Go—No‐Go paradigm in attention deficit disorder
Abstract
We administered the go—no‐go paradigm to 44 boys with attention deficit disorder (ADD) and 32 control subjects who did not have ADD. This task requires a subject to emit a simple motor response to one cue while inhibiting the response in the presence of another cue. Commission errors suggest impulsivity, and omission errors suggest inattention. ADD subjects made more total errors than did control subjects (p < 0.03), and more ADD subjects made multiple errors (p < 0.001). Within the ADD group, the nonhyperactive (ADDnoH) subjects were characterized by a high number of commission errors early, and significant improvement with practice (p < 0.01). In contrast, the hyperactive ADD subjects (ADD/H) did not differ from control subjects in number of early commission errors, but differed from both control subjects and ADDnoH subjects in their failure to improve with practice. In addition, the incidence of omission errors was highest in the ADD/H group. This paradigm can be easily incorporated into the assessment of children with suspected ADD and provides an objective measure of inattention and impulsivity. Our data provide cognitive support for the empirical distinction between hyperactive and nonhyperactive children with ADD.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Go–no go learning after frontal lobe lesions in humans
Drewe, E. A. (1975) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(75)80015-3 · Cited by 369
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- 10.1002/ana.410180518 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00237911 · DOI · Paper page
- Douglas VI, 1983, Developmental neuropsychiatry, 280
- American Psychiatric Association, 1980, Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
- 10.1007/BF00919127 · DOI · Paper page
- Mesulam M‐M, 1985, Principles of behavioral neurology
- Luria AR, 1973, The working brain, 187
- 10.1016/0887-8994(87)90077-4 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-006X.51.6.954 · DOI
Cited by
Executive functions and developmental psychopathology.
Pennington, B. F., & Ozonoff, S. (1996) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1996.tb01380.x · Cited by 3,150
Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control
Bari, A., & Robbins, T. W. (2013) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.06.005 · Cited by 1,921
Training and transfer effects of executive functions in preschool children
Thorell, L. B., Lindqvist, S., Bergman Nutley, S., Bohlin, G., & Klingberg, T. (2009) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00745.x · Cited by 1,041
Rubia, K., Overmeyer, S., Taylor, E., Brammer, M., Williams, S. C. R., Simmons, A., & Bullmore, E. T. (1999) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.156.6.891 · Cited by 1,010
Barkley, R. A., Grodzinsky, G., & DuPaul, G. J. (1992) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1007/bf00916547 · Cited by 724
Metadata
- Authors
- Trommer, B. L., Hoeppner, J. B., Lorber, R., & Armstrong, K. J.
- Venue
- Annals of Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-11
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 610-614
- ISSN
- 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-8249
- OpenAlex
- W2048899385
- Cited by
- 216
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Go—No‐Go paradigm in attention deficit disorder. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ana.410240504
- The paper
- Trommer, B. L., Hoeppner, J. B., Lorber, R., & Armstrong, K. J. (1988). The Go—No‐Go paradigm in attention deficit disorder. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410240504
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.