Cited by 139Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Questioning inhibitory control as the specific deficit of ADHD ? evidence from brain electrical activity

Banaschewski, T., Brandeis, D., Heinrich, H., Albrecht, B., Brunner, E., Rothenberger, A.·2004·Journal of Neural Transmission

Abstract

Objective To investigate motor response control during a cued continuous performance test (CPT-A-X) by performance and ERP parameters in children with hyperkinetic disorder (HD), hyperkinetic conduct disorder (HCD) or oppositional deviant/conduct disorder (ODD/CD), to examine the evidence for an inhibition-specific deficit as indicated by these parameters, and to analyze whether possible deviations are specific for HD/HCD.Method Behavioral parameters and event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded during a CPT-A-X-task in children (aged 8 to 14 years) with either HD (n = 15), HCD (n = 16), or ODD/CD (n = 15) and normal children (n = 18) and analysed. ICD-10 diagnoses of HD/HCD diagnoses in all children were fully concordant with the DSM-IV diagnosis of ADHD-combined type.Results Children with HCD committed more dyscontrol errors and differed most from normal children on ERP measures of motor response control, while children with HD-only were more impaired during processing of the warning stimuli for motor preparation. ERP measures specific for response inhibition were not different between the groups.Conclusions The results show that ADHD cannot be fully explained by an inhibition-specific deficit and implicate impaired response execution processes as well. This indicates that comorbid children suffer from a reduced ability to control their prepared motor responses. Further, they seem to have difficulties in timely switching attention from monitoring the sensory input stream to the monitoring of own responses and actions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00702-003-0040-8

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 86 · Cited by 139

Authors
Banaschewski, T., Brandeis, D., Heinrich, H., Albrecht, B., Brunner, E., & Rothenberger, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
Venue
Journal of Neural Transmission
Published
2003-10-24
Volume
111
Issue
7
Pages
841-64
ISSN
  • 0300-9564 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-1463
OpenAlex
W2107299349
Cited by
139
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 21
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Transmission (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, hyperkinetic disorder, inhibitory control, response inhibition, event-related potentials, continuous performance test, response execution, attentional shift, children
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Analysis of Variance, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Brain, Child, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Statistics, Nonparametric

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