Cited by 296Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Executive Functioning Heterogeneity in Pediatric ADHD

Open access
Kofler, Michael J., Irwin, Lauren N., Soto, Elia F., Groves, Nicole B., Harmon, Sherelle L., Sarver, Dustin E.·2019·Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

Abstract

Neurocognitive heterogeneity is increasingly recognized as a valid phenomenon in ADHD, with most estimates suggesting that executive dysfunction is present in only about 33%-50% of these children. However, recent critiques question the veracity of these estimates because our understanding of executive functioning in ADHD is based, in large part, on data from single tasks developed to detect gross neurological impairment rather than the specific executive processes hypothesized to underlie the ADHD phenotype. The current study is the first to comprehensively assess heterogeneity in all three primary executive functions in ADHD using a criterion battery that includes multiple tests per construct (working memory, inhibitory control, set shifting). Children ages 8-13 (M = 10.37, SD = 1.39) with and without ADHD (N = 136; 64 girls; 62% Caucasian/Non-Hispanic) completed a counterbalanced series of executive function tests. Accounting for task unreliability, results indicated significantly improved sensitivity and specificity relative to prior estimates, with 89% of children with ADHD demonstrating objectively-defined impairment on at least one executive function (62% impaired working memory, 27% impaired inhibitory control, 38% impaired set shifting; 54% impaired on one executive function, 35% impaired on two or all three executive functions). Children with working memory deficits showed higher parent- and teacher-reported ADHD inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive symptoms (BF 10 = 5.23 × 10 4), and were slightly younger (BF 10 = 11.35) than children without working memory deficits. Children with vs. without set shifting or inhibitory control deficits did not differ on ADHD symptoms, age, gender, IQ, SES, or medication status. Taken together, these findings confirm that ADHD is characterized by neurocognitive heterogeneity, while suggesting that contemporary, cognitively-informed criteria may provide improved precision for identifying a smaller number of neuropsychologically-impaired subtypes than previously described.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10802-018-0438-2

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

3 of 24 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Background

    It reports that working memory impairments are found in 30% to 37% and inhibitory control deficits in 21% to 46% of pediatric ADHD cases.

    “Working memory impairments are reported in 30% to 37% (Coghill et al., 2014; Fair et al., 2012), and inhibitory control deficits are detected in 21%–46% of pediatric ADHD cases (Coghill et al., 2014; Nigg et al., 2005; Solanto et al., 2001; Sonuga-Barke et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Coghill et al., 2014 source
    • cites Fair et al., 2012 source

      In Results (page unavailable), Fair et al. identify two ADHD subgroups with reduced working memory, comprising 17% and 20% of their ADHD sample—37% combined. The paper does not report the 30% lower bound, so it supports only part of the cited range. Fair et al. are cited for the working-memory clause, not the separate inhibitory-control range. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Nigg et al., 2005 source
  • Background

    It states that no ADHD heterogeneity study had simultaneously measured and controlled all three primary executive functions, and single-task assessments may limit conclusions.

    “no study of ADHD-related heterogeneity has simultaneously measured and controlled for all three primary executive functions (Miyake et al., 2000), and conclusions may be limited by the use of single tasks to assess neurocognitive construct(s) (Conway et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Coghill et al. (2014) source
    • cites Miyake et al., 2000 source
    • cites Conway et al., 2005 source
  • Background

    It reports that estimates of any executive dysfunction among pediatric ADHD cases range from 21% to 60% across studies.

    “estimates for the proportion of pediatric ADHD cases who exhibit any form of executive dysfunction range from 21% to 60% across studies employing a wide range of tasks and impairment criteria (Biederman et al., 2004; Coghill et al., 2014; Fair, Bathula, Nikolas, & Nigg, 2012; Geurts, van der Oord, & Crone, 2006; Nigg et al., 2005; Solanto et al., 2001; Sonuga-Barke, Bitsalou, & Thompson, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Biederman et al., 2004 source
    • cites Coghill et al., 2014 source
    • cites Fair, Bathula, Nikolas, & Nigg, 2012 source

      The introduction says that only a subset of children with ADHD may be affected on any one neuropsychological measure, and the Results identify distinct ADHD subgroups. But the Results’ 21% refers to one subgroup with relatively high reaction-time variability; the paper does not report a 21%–60% range for any executive dysfunction across studies or impairment criteria. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Finding

    An oblique factor solution, allowing covariation among EF estimates, yielded 84% of the ADHD group meeting impairment criteria.

    “Highly similar results were also obtained when allowing covariation among the three executive functioning estimates by specifying an oblique rather than orthogonal factor solution (84% of ADHD sample classified as impaired; sensitivity = 83.64% [71.20, 92.23], specificity = 81.48% [73.30, 89.25]).”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    About half of the ADHD children were impaired on one executive function, while 31% were impaired on two and 4% on all three.

    “Approximately half of the children with ADHD showed impairment on a single executive function (54%), and an additional third showed impairments on two (31%) or all three (4%) executive functions.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified

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?

  • Results indicated that children with ADHD have large working memory deficits and medium-to-null inhibitory control and set shifting deficits relative to children without ADHD.

    “Results indicated that children with ADHD have large working memory deficits and medium-to-null inhibitory control and set shifting deficits relative to children without ADHD.51,53,56,58,75”

    From Executive function deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Results (Tier 1: Executive Functioning Impairments in ADHD; page unavailable) report more frequent working-memory impairment (62%) than inhibitory-control (27%) or set-shifting impairment (38%) among children with ADHD, using the non-ADHD group as the reference. This supports the relative pattern, but those percentages do not establish the claimed large versus medium-to-null magnitudes of the group differences. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A series of studies by some of the authors included children with ADHD and ASD, controlled for ASD when evaluating executive functions in ADHD, and used a battery of construct-valid working memory tests.

    “a series of studies by some of the authors of the current Review included children with ADHD and ASD, controlled for ASD when evaluating executive functions in ADHD, and used a battery of construct-valid working memory tests.”

    From Executive function deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Method (Group Assignment; page unavailable) includes children with ASD in both the ADHD and non-ADHD groups and reports the same ASD rate (5%) in each. The Current Study and Method (Measures; pages unavailable) describe a battery with multiple criterion tests, including validated working-memory tasks. This paper describes one study, not a series, and its ASD control was through group composition rather than a reported ASD-specific statistical adjustment. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Only 17% of children with ADHD have impairments in both inhibition and working memory, vs. 46% who have working memory but not inhibition deficits, and only 11% who have inhibition deficits but not working memory deficits.

    “Similarly, Kofler et al. (9) reported that only 17% of children with ADHD have impairments in both inhibition and working memory (vs. 46% who have working memory but not inhibition deficits, and only 11% who have inhibition deficits but not working memory deficits).”

    From Working memory and inhibitory control deficits in children with ADHD: an experimental evaluation of competing model predictions (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Results (Tier 1: Executive Functioning Impairments in ADHD; page unavailable) report that 62% of children with ADHD had working-memory impairment and 27% had inhibitory-control impairment, supporting the general pattern that working-memory deficits were more common. Our copy does not give the claimed 17% overlap, 46% working-memory-only, or 11% inhibition-only breakdown; the reported marginal rates cannot establish those joint percentages. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The finding is consistent with evidence that only 5-11% of children with ADHD have inhibition deficits without co-occurring working memory deficits.

    “Although these effect sizes are not directly comparable because they reflect performance changes vs. between group differences, this finding is consistent with evidence that only 5-11% of children with ADHD have inhibition deficits without co-occurring working memory deficits (9, 74) and calls into question the extent to which children with ADHD have deficits in inhibitory control versus perform”

    From Working memory and inhibitory control deficits in children with ADHD: an experimental evaluation of competing model predictions (2024) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Results (Tier 1: Executive Functioning Impairments in ADHD; page unavailable) report inhibitory-control deficits in 27% of children with ADHD and working-memory deficits in 62%. They do not report how many had inhibition deficits without co-occurring working-memory deficits, so the cited paper does not establish the claimed 5–11% range. Its 11% figure refers instead to children unimpaired on all three executive functions. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recent heterogeneity studies classified 62%-85% of children with ADHD as impaired in working memory.

    “Furthermore, highly similar results were reported in recent heterogeneity studies reporting that 62%−85% of children with ADHD were classified as impaired in working memory (Fosco et al., in press; Karalunas et al., 2017; Kofler, Irwin et al., 2019).”

    From Working memory and short-term memory deficits in ADHD: A bifactor modeling approach (2020) · cites this paper as Kofler, Irwin et al., 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

  • Ethnicity counts omit five participants

    Minor

    The ethnicity categories total 131 children, but the stated sample contains 136. The text does not identify an ethnicity category or missing ethnicity data for the other five children.

    Reported 136 · recomputed 131

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 94 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kofler, M. J., Sarver, D. E., Harmon, S. L., Moltisanti, A., Aduen, P. A., Soto, E. F., & Ferretti, N. (2017). Working memory and organizational skills problems in ADHD. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.
  2. Sattler, J., Dumont, R., & Coalson, D. (2016). Assessment of Children: WISC-V and WPPSI-IV. San Diego: Sattler Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kofler, M. J., Irwin, L. N., Soto, E. F., Groves, N. B., Harmon, S. L., & Sarver, D. E.
Affiliations
  • Florida State University (US)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Kofler, Michael J.
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Published
2018-04-28
Volume
47
Issue
2
Pages
273-286
ISSN
  • 0091-0627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2835
OpenAlex
W2799310259
Cited by
288
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R34 MH102499)
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, executive function, working memory, inhibitory control, set-shifting, executive dysfunction, diagnostic criteria, inattentive symptoms, hyperactive-impulsive symptoms, children
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Executive Function

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.

Claims read (extract-v2) on 2026-09-26.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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