Cited by 86Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Response Style Differences in the Inattentive and Combined Subtypes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Derefinko, Karen J., Adams, Zachary W., Milich, Richard, Fillmore, Mark T., Lorch, Elizabeth P., Lynam, Donald R.·2008·Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

Abstract

This study examined potential differences between the inattentive and combined ADHD subtypes using laboratory tasks assessing behavioral inhibitory processes. Seventy-five children completed two tasks of behavioral inhibition believed to isolate different processes: the cued reaction time task (CRT), a basic inhibition task, and the go/no-go task (GNG), a complex inhibition task that incorporates motivational contingencies. Three groups of participants were identified, including ADHD/Inattentive (n = 17), ADHD/Combined (n = 37), and comparison (n = 21). Results indicated that rather than showing behavioral inhibition deficits, the ADHD/I children appeared overly inhibited, as evidenced by slower reaction times across the two tasks and significantly higher errors of omission in the GNG task. Additionally, the ADHD/I children did not demonstrate cue dependency effects on the CRT task, suggesting that they were failing to incorporate relevant information before making a response. The sluggish and inhibited performance of the ADHD/I group challenges the idea that it is a subtype of ADHD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10802-007-9207-3

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Derefinko, K. J., Adams, Z. W., Milich, R., Fillmore, M. T., Lorch, E. P., & Lynam, D. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Milich, Richard
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Published
2008-01-03
Volume
36
Issue
5
Pages
745-758
ISSN
  • 0091-0627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2835
OpenAlex
W2080230802
Cited by
86
References
80
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UKnowledge (University of Kentucky) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA021722)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21DA021027, DA021027, DA005312, P50DA005312)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, inattentive subtype, combined subtype, behavioral inhibition, response styles, go/no-go task, children, ADHD subtypes
MeSH terms
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Cognition Disorders, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Motivation, Neuropsychological Tests, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Reaction Time, Reproducibility of Results, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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