The DOI matches its Crossref record; 135 of the 136 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; none of the 120 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Context-dependent Dynamic Processes in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Differentiating Common and Unique Effects of State Regulation Deficits and Delay Aversion
Open accessAbstract
The ability to specify differential predictions is a mark of a scientific models' value. State regulation deficits (SRD) and delay aversion (DAv) have both been hypothesized as context-dependent dynamic dysfunctions in ADHD. However, to date there has been no systematic comparison of their common and unique elements. Here we review these hypotheses-and describe the core and secondary manifestations of the two constructs and review evidence in support of them. Second, we focus on what are seen as the hallmark indicators of the two deficits-preference of small immediate over large delayed rewards for DAv and the slow event rate effect for SRD. We describe the overlap between these two manifestations and then explore how experimental manipulations and the analysis of neuropsychological and physiological mediators of effects can allow us to differentiate these two patterns of neuropsychological dysfunction on the basis of specific predictions. Finally, we highlight the implications of neuropsychological heterogeneity for the practical implementation of tests of DAv and SRD.
Checked 2026-10-06 · 1 reference not checked yet
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review compares delay aversion (DAv) and state regulation deficit (SRD) as context-dependent accounts of ADHD and argues that they overlap but can be distinguished by specific experimental predictions. It concludes that neuropsychological heterogeneity means neither construct likely explains all ADHD, so future work should partition subgroups rather than test one theory against the other.
Key findings
- DAv and SRD both predict context- and state-dependent performance, but differ in predicted patterns: SRD predicts a nonlinear inverted-U effect of event rate, with deficits at both fast and slow rates and better performance at intermediate rates; DAv predicts linear-like worsening as delays lengthen or event rates slow.
- Stimulant medication predictions diverge: SRD allows that methylphenidate could impair performance if it pushes an already optimal state into overactivation, whereas DAv predicts neutral or beneficial effects across conditions.
- Evidence supports both constructs, but effects are modest and inconsistent; case-control neuropsychological differences are no larger than moderate (Cohen’s d < .7), and only subgroups of ADHD cases show any one deficit.
- Heterogeneity is illustrated by Solanto et al. (2001): DAv and inhibitory deficits were uncorrelated and produced four subgroups (DAv only, inhibitory only, both, neither); a similar dissociation was reported for SRD and executive deficits.
Methods
- Conceptual and theoretical review, not an empirical study; no new sample or primary data are reported.
- Synthesizes prior behavioral, psychophysiological, neuroimaging, and pharmacological evidence for DAv and SRD.
- Proposes differential predictions and experimental manipulations—event rate, pre- and post-reward delay, stimulation type, and stimulant medication—plus multivariate approaches to identify patient subgroups.
Limitations
- The paper states that no systematic in-depth comparison of DAv and SRD existed before; it also notes unresolved questions about how motor readiness and effort allocation interact in SRD and whether overactivation effects are absent or difficult to induce.
- It states that optimal event rates and delays vary by task and individual, making tests difficult; evidence for overactivation is scarce, and direct tests of neurobiological independence are lacking.
- Evident from the text: as a review, it offers no new empirical validation of the proposed differentiating tests, and it notes that co-occurrence of DAv and SRD and individual-level classification remain unclear.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 120 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In keeping with this, context has been shown to play an important role in determining the extent to which performance on executive tasks is deficient in ADHD (cf.Shiels et al., 2008; but see also Shanahan et al., 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Finally, when two distinctly different impairments are studied in the same sample different patients appear to be affected by each one.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is often characterized as a preference for smaller sooner (SS) over larger later rewards (LL) (see Willcutt et al., 2008 for a meta-analysis; but see also Scheres et al., 2006 andBidwell et al., 2007; for a counter case).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Theoretical Formulation:
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“In contrast to this generally disappointing picture is the more consistent evidence for an effect of delay, prior to delivery of rewards, on ADHD children's responses and choices (Tripp and Alsop, 2001).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Theoretical Formulation:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Tripp and Alsop, 2001 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“are unusually vigilant to environmental delay-related cues (Sonuga-Barke et al., 2004)”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sonuga-Barke et al., 2004 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“ADHD cases can be satisfactorily differentiated from controls in terms of their choices of SS over LL rewards (Kuntsi et al., 2001;Antrop et al., 2006;Bitsakou et al., 2009;Marco et al., 2009;Sonuga-Barke et al., 1992;Schweitzer and Sulzer-Azaroff, 1995;Solanto et al., 2001;Hoerger and Mace, 2006;Dalen et al., 2004;Marco et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“For instance, ADHD children respond inappropriately to the unexpected imposition of delay (Bitsakou et al, 2006) and extinction of reward (Sagvolden et al., 1998); prematurely disengage from long and challenging tasks (Scime and Norvilitis, 2006); show more activity than controls during delay (Antrop et al., 2003); are biased towards task responses tied to immediate rewards (Tripp and Alsop, 2001)”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bitsakou et al, 2006 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“ADHD children respond inappropriately to the unexpected imposition of delay (Bitsakou et al, 2006) and extinction of reward (Sagvolden et al., 1998)”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sagvolden et al., 1998 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“prematurely disengage from long and challenging tasks (Scime and Norvilitis, 2006)”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Scime and Norvilitis, 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Despite this heterogeneity, the pooled size of this effect (Willcutt et al., 2008) compares favorably with those reported in the Willcutt et al., (2005) meta-analysis of executive function deficits in ADHD.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Willcutt et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites Willcutt et al., 2005 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 40
- Probably not a substantial claim. 38
In the paper
“For instance, many children with ADHD appear not to have dysfunctional executive processes, while many children without ADHD, either with others disorders or with no disorder at all, do (Willcutt et al., 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Willcutt et al., 2005 source
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Even where ADHD and executive dysfunction co-present the pattern is rather fragmented and variable so that pervasive and severe executive deficit appears quite rare (Nigg et al., 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Nigg et al., 2005
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, only a sub-sample of ADHD cases seem to show any one deficit to a clinically significant degree and then rarely in a sufficiently pervasive and severe form to suggest a unitary cause for all children (Nigg et al., 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Nigg et al., 2005
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“More recently, a similar pattern was found for SRD and executive deficits (but not DAv; Wåhlstedt et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Wåhlstedt et al., 2009 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“So for instance, where there is a choice between different levels of delay associated with different activities and outcomes, and escape from delay is possible, children with ADHD choose SS over LL rewards or invest less time and effort in a task even though it would lead to poorer performance and associated outcomes (Sonuga-Barke et al., 2004).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Secondary adaptations: DAv can also be manifest in non-choice settings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sonuga-Barke et al., 2004 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, a recent review failed to provide much convincing evidence for specific alterations in a wide range of different putative motivational mechanisms theorized, at one time or another, to be implicated in ADHD (e.g., over-or under-sensitivity to reward delivery; Luman et al., 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Theoretical Formulation:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Luman et al., 2005 source
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“First, the effect size of case-control differences in neuropsychological or neurological deficits are never more than moderate (Cohen's d < .7;Willcutt et al., 2008) with ADHD accounting for only a small proportion of variation in these factors.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Willcutt et al., 2008
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For instance, the classic paper by Solanto et al., (2001) illustrates this most clearly -DAv and inhibitory control deficits were uncorrelated but yet both were associated with ADHD: Four subgroups of children could be identified -DAv and no inhibitory deficits; inhibitory deficits and no DAv; both deficits and neither deficits (see also Thorell, 2007).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“To date the role of structural and/or functional alterations within this circuit in ADHD remain under-researched although recent studies suggest underactivation in the ventral striatum in ADHD following the signaling of future rewards (Scheres et al., 2007) and over-activation of the amygdala as delay to rewards increase (Plichta et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Scheres et al., 2007 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, our understanding of the functional neuroanatomy of delay-related activity more generally is developing with, for instance, the suggestion that different brain networks are differentially activated in relation to rewards and delay (Ballard and Knutson, 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ballard and Knutson, 2009
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“although a subsequent analysis suggested that there might actually be two separate delay-related factors; Bitsakou and Sonuga-Barke, submitted”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Secondary adaptations: DAv can also be manifest in non-choice settings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bitsakou and Sonuga-Barke, submitted
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Stimulant medication (e.g., methylphenidate and amphetamine) reduces symptoms of ADHD and improves academic and more general functioning (Taylor and Sonuga-Barke, 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Taylor and Sonuga-Barke, 2008
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed Gregorios-Pippas et al., (2009) recently demonstrated that the ventral striatum is highly sensitive to relatively minor temporal alterations on reward discounting tasks.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gregorios-Pippas et al., 2009
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Consistent with a motivational account of the therapeutic action of methylphenidate, Volkow et al. (2004) has shown that the effects of methylphenidate on performance on an academic task appear to be mediated by an increase in task salience and enhanced positive task valence.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Volkow et al., 2004
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“These effects can be mirrored in improved performance on laboratory-based cognitive tasks (Coghill et al., 2007).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Coghill et al., 2007 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“To date the role of structural and/or functional alterations within this circuit in ADHD remain under-researched although recent studies suggest underactivation in the ventral striatum in ADHD following the signaling of future rewards (Scheres et al., 2007) and over-activation of the amygdala as delay to rewards increase (Plichta et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Plichta et al., 2009 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence from animal (Bizot et al., 2007) and human models (van Gaalen et al., 2006) suggest that stimulants reduce impulsiveness and increase preference for delayed over immediate rewards (Pietras et al., 2003) and speed up the 'internal clock' thereby reducing the perception of the passage of external time (Mattel et al., 2004).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bizot et al., 2007
- Not checked yetcites van Gaalen et al., 2006
- Not checked yetcites Pietras et al., 2003
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although the effect appears generally robust there is a degree of variability across studies with a number reporting negative results (Bidwell et al., 2007;Scheres et al., 2006;Wåhlstedt, et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In one study, ADHD children's preference for LL increased when they were given access to additional stimulation -a finding consistent with the relationship between DAv and stimulation seeking (Antrop et al., 2006).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Antrop et al., 2006
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The first study examining the extent to which methylphenidate reduces impulsive choice in ADHD using a discounting procedure has been published with positive results (Shiels et al., in press).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Shiels et al., in press
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Two other recent studies give rather mixed results in relation to related concepts (Risk Taking/Gambling -DeVito et al., 2008;reflection/impulsivity -DeVito et al. 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites DeVito et al., 2008
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In this study ADHD children chose SS over LL more than controls under both conditions -but this preference was greater when there was no post-reward delay and overall delay could be avoided.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Marco et al., 2009 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As far as ADHD sub-types are concerned it has been suggested that DAv may be associated with the hyperactive/impulsive dimension rather than the inattentive one.Inconsistent with the DAv theory, a recent study by Scheres et al. (2008) supported this notion.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Scheres et al., 2008 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Heterogeneity is an established characteristic of ADHD at the level of etiology (with different genes and different environments being implicated in different individuals; Zhou et al., 2008) and at the level of clinical presentation (as captured by diagnostic subtypes; Brookes et al., 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zhou et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites Brookes et al., 2008
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Executive functions are themselves dynamic processes and performance on executive tasks will fluctuate from state-tostate and setting-to-setting (Nigg and Casey, 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > MOVING BEYOND FIXED DEFICIT MODELS OF ADHD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Nigg and Casey, 2005
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“DAv can also be manifest in non-choice settings through what we refer to here as secondary adaptations -in this sense DAv has a broad impact across different choice and non-choice settings -with effects being context specific (Sonuga-Barke, 1994;Sonuga-Barke, 2005;Bitsakou et al., 2009).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Secondary adaptations: DAv can also be manifest in non-choice settings
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In keeping with the notion that executive deficits and DAv are dissociable elements within the pathophysiology of ADHD, they appear to be based within different brain circuits (Dalley et al., 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dalley et al., 2008
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is therefore some initial support for the statistical overlap between primary manifestations and secondary adaptations of DAv, although this may be more complicated than initially thought.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Secondary adaptations: DAv can also be manifest in non-choice settings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Dopamine is a key neuro-modulator (Cools, 2008) and appears to play a special role in the control of delay-related responding (Roesch et al., 2007).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cools, 2008
- Not checked yetcites Roesch et al., 2007
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“At a cellular level it seems fairly clear that stimulant drugs increase levels of extra-cellular dopamine either by increasing its release, (e.g., amphetamines; Joyce et al., 2007), or reducing its reuptake by blocking the dopamine or norepinephrine transporter (e.g., methylphenidate; Schiffer et al., 2006).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis: It has been speculated that the biological basis of
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Joyce et al., 2007
- Not checked yetcites Schiffer et al., 2006
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In this model task efficiency is considered as a product of a combination of elementary cognitive stages (level 1 -stimulus encoding, memory search, binary decision and motor preparation) and their energy distribution (level 2 and 3 -see figure 2).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore if deficits in ADHD were to be located exclusively at this level, independent of levels 2 and 3, this would be consistent with a model that presents ADHD as the result of a fixed core cognitive deficit.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although at first arousal was seen as a unified construct, being the non-directional component of motivation, later accounts (Mulder, 1986;Sanders, 1983Sanders, , 1998)), have drawn a useful distinction between phasic arousal processes and tonic activation processes, with the former specifically affecting input processes (i.e., stimulus encoding) and the later affecting output processes (i.e., mot”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mulder, 1986
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As is the case with executive deficits these effects are relatively modest in size suggesting neuropsychological heterogeneity and that only a sub-set of ADHD children display DAv.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In part the impulsive choices associated with substance abuse disorders and conduct disorders may be due to the overlap between these conditions and ADHD, or at least to a common neuro-biological vulnerability (Szobot and Bukstein, 2008).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Szobot and Bukstein, 2008
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These models emphasize that impairment in ADHD is highly variable as a function of context.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary there is evidence to support the notion that ADHD children can be DAv in both the narrow sense of choosing SS over LL rewards to escape delay in choice situations and in the broader sense as in seen in the effects of time-on-task/trial length on performance in non-choice situations.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Level 1components are seen as core structural processes that mediate between a stimulus and response.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Effort (level 3) is necessary to meet task demands and to compensate for a sub-optimal energetic state by modulating arousal and activation levels.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The development of SRD accounts of ADHD are situated within the cognitiveenergetic framework of information processing efficiency developed by Sanders (1983Sanders ( , 1998)).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“According to the cognitive energetic framework the functioning of these elementary stages at level 1 is regulated by the arousal and activation processes of the subject represented at level 2.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast to the DAv model, however, their primary focus is on the energetic state of the ADHD child and they have as their primary goal the explanation of statespecific and context dependent aspects of cognitive performance deficits.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Energetic processes are also affected by task characteristics.For instance, arousal level is influenced by stimulus repetition.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Worse performance in a slow condition by adults with ADHD was accompanied, together with diminished activity in thalamus, by less activity in ACC”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kooistra et al, 2006
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Using Sternberg's additive factor method (1969), Sanders showed that the processing stages at level 1, as well as the energetic levels 2 and 3 could be separately influenced by what he called 'task manipulations'.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sternberg, 1969 source
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1983
- Not checked yetcites Sanders, 1998
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The typically slow and variable response style in ADHD, when stimuli are presented at a low rate, is a consistent finding in these studies, whereas findings are mixed with respect to errors of commission”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Börger et al., 2000a
- Not checked yetcites Potgieter et al., 2000
- Not checked yetcites Scheres et al., 2001 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a general sense the SRD model of ADHD deficits sees these as being due to failures to properly regulate energetical state (arousal/activation) when challenged to do so in sub-optimal settings or states.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“From an SRD perspective this is interpreted as evidence that slow event rates produce under-activation and that MPH increases the activation state, which in turn results in enhanced task performance”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Neurobiological Basis:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sikstrom and Söderlund, 2007 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hallmark of this deficit is the impact of variations in required activation level induced by changes in task characteristics on task performance.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of these, event rate has been seen as a / the key probe of activation processes.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > II: State Regulation Deficits
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neuropsychological heterogeneity significantly alters the way we conceptualise, theorise and measure neuropsychological dysfunction in ADHD.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > ISSUES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: ADHD is neuropsychologically heterogeneous.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, the DAv model predicts linear-like effects whereby performance deficits are expected on delayed compared with a non-delayed condition; the prediction being no difference under high event rate conditions, some differences emerging on intermediate trials and the largest effects on slow event rate conditions.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Event rate effects: Can they differentiate SRD from DAv processes in ADHD?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Kooistra et al, (2006) fMRI study mentioned above indicated that the anterior cingulate and the thalamus are involved in maintaining a state of optimal readiness to respond through effort allocation; during a slow event rate, these areas were less active in adults who had been diagnosed with ADHD as children.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kooistra et al, (2006)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Children with ADHD were found to have a rapid decline in task efficiency over time with a slow presentation rate, but not with a fast presentation rate”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites van der Meere, 2002
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general terms they both highlight the dynamic and context dependent nature of task performance”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > CAN DELAY AVERSION AND STATE REGULATION DEFICIT PROCESSES BE DIFFERENTIATED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR COMMONLY ACCEPTED SIGNAL PREDICTIONS?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SS is related to higher event rate and LL to lower.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One might also predict that these effects would be more strongly related to delay level (event rate) than reward magnitude per se.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
Tests✗ Asserted: fails✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that ADHD children choose SS over LL more than controls has traditionally been regarded as the hallmark of DAv.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The DAv account see accessing stimulation during delay as a means of altering the perception and aversiveness of the passage of time during delay.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, is the dynamic nature of these processes and effects and the way that they vary from time-to-time and setting to setting.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > ISSUES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the DAv model the stimulation would be most influential in reducing preference for SS if it is non-temporal in nature (i.e., de-emphasized time in passing) while temporal stimulation should make time drag and increase preference for SS.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For DAv, as with the SRD model performance is expected to be worse 'off' medication under slow event rates.However, in contrast to the SRD model the DAv theory predicts that medication would have either a neutral or a positive effect on performance in the fast rate condition.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Event rate effects: Can they differentiate SRD from DAv processes in ADHD?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the SRD and DAv theoretical constructs share many features in common and often make similar predictions.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > CAN DELAY AVERSION AND STATE REGULATION DEFICIT PROCESSES BE DIFFERENTIATED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR COMMONLY ACCEPTED SIGNAL PREDICTIONS?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“differentiating these different elements relies on dissecting some rather subtle distinctions -with the two different underlying patterns of impairment expressing themselves in very similar ways in many settings.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > ISSUES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, in SDR both event rate and MPH are regarded as important regulators of activation state and these factors are predicted to act additively to change the cognitive energetic dynamics of the task and therefore alter performance.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Event rate effects: Can they differentiate SRD from DAv processes in ADHD?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is especially pronounced where choice of the SS allows the child to reduce trial/session length (Marco et al., 2009) and seems to be normalised where patients are allowed access to additional stimulation during delay (Antrop et al., 2006).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Choice of small immediate over large delayed rewards: Can they differentiate Delay Aversion and State Regulation Deficit accounts?
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Marco et al., 2009 source
- Not checked yetcites Antrop et al., 2006
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The ISI effect on RT performance diminishes as a function of age (van der Meere and Stemerdink, 1999), is independent of IQ level (van der Meere and van der Meere, 2004), and differentiates at the group level between ADHD and aggressive behaviour problems such as conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder (van der Meere et al., 2005).”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites van der Meere and Stemerdink, 1999 source
- Not checked yetcites van der Meere and van der Meere, 2004
- Not checked yetcites van der Meere et al., 2005
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While these two notions share some features we established their conceptual and theoretical distinctiveness”
- Also stated in: § ISSUES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION · plain
“we can differentiate SRD and DAv in terms of concepts and predictions”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > IN SUMMARY
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes? Checkable: unclear✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § ISSUES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND APPLICATION · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the perspective of the SRD model these findings are consistent with the notion that ADHD are either easily under-activated or find it more difficult to counteract under-activation.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Evidence Base:
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, in the DAv hypothesis MPH is predicted to operate by increasing the salience of events and/or improving their valence by changing time perception and/or enhancing the signalling of future events and rewards.”
§ CONTEXT DEPENDENT-DYNAMIC PROCESSES IN ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER: DIFFERENTIATING COMMON AND UNIQUE EFFECTS OF STATE REGULATION DEFICITS AND DELAY AVERSION > Event rate effects: Can they differentiate SRD from DAv processes in ADHD?
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
There has been no systematic in-depth attempt to compare and contrast DAv and SRD in the literature.
“Given this uncertainty it is perhaps surprising that there has been no systematic in-depth attempt to compare and contrast DAv and SRD so far in the literature.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There has been no direct study of the independence of the neurobiological foundations of executive deficits and DAv within ADHD.
“However, there has to date been no direct study of the independence of the neurobiological foundations of these distinctive elements within ADHD.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The relationship between cognitive energetic processes and performance follows an inverted U function.
“the relationship between cognitive energetic processes and performance as affected by these factors is predicted to follow an inverted 'U' function.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The concept of optimality can be extended from required to desired event rate/delay.
“if we assume that the concept of optimality can be extended from required to desired event rate/delay as described above.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ADHD is neuropsychologically heterogeneous.
“Neuropsychological heterogeneity significantly alters the way we conceptualise, theorise and measure neuropsychological dysfunction in ADHD.”
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Last, there is considerable heterogeneity in cognitive impairments, with some patients not showing impairments or only in some cognitive domains, which may be underpinned by different pathophysiological pathways (Sonuga-Barke, 2003; Nigg et al., 2005; Sonuga-Barke et al., 2010).”
From Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Its Clinical Translation (2018) · cites this paper as Sonuga-Barke et al., 2010
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Interestingly, the anticipation of forced waiting times, which are particularly aversive to individuals with ADHD (Sonuga-Barke et al., 2010) also elicited enhanced amygdala activation (Wilbertz et al., 2013).”
From Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Its Clinical Translation (2018) · cites this paper as Sonuga-Barke et al., 2010
In the citing paper
“Most studies report that ADHD-related increases in RTV disappear are attenuated, and often disappear, during faster ERs [39,83,85,86].”
From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [85]
In the citing paper
“Alternatively, long ERs, relative to what is optimal for the task, appear to exacerbate ADHD-related between-group differences [14,85].”
From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [85]
Citations
Cites
(1994) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 10,542
The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life
LeDoux, J. E. (2004) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,212
Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E., Nigg, J. T., Faraone, S. V., & Pennington, B. F. (2005) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.02.006 · Cited by 3,568
The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method
Sternberg, S. (1969) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9 · Cited by 3,137
Affective neuroscience of pleasure: reward in humans and animals
Berridge, K. C., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2008) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-008-1099-6 · Cited by 1,254
Arousal, activation, and effort in the control of attention.
Pribram, K. H., & McGuinness, D. (1975) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0076780 · Cited by 1,208
Characterizing cognition in ADHD: beyond executive dysfunction
Castellanos, F. X., Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., Milham, M. P., & Tannock, R. (2006) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.01.011 · Cited by 1,170
Self-citationsagvolden, T., johansen, E. B., aase, H., & russell, V. A. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000075 · Cited by 1,035
Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S. (2005) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.09.008 · Cited by 962
Self-citationImpulsive choice induced in rats by lesions of the nucleus accumbens core
Cardinal, R. N., Pennicott, D. R., Lakmali, C., Sugathapala, Robbins, T. W., & Everitt, B. J. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1060818 · Cited by 923
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Damasio, A. R. (1994). Decartes error. Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Avon Books.
- Shiels, K., Hawk, L.W., Jr., Reynolds, B., Mazzullo, R., Rhodes, J., Pelham, W.E., Jr., et al. (in press). The effects of methylphenidate on discounting of delayed rewards in ADHD. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–141 of 141
Drescher, L. H., Boehler, C. N., & Wiersema, J. R. (2023) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.103877 · Cited by 4
Self-citationSlachevsky, A., Carolina Pérez, J., Silva, J. R., Ruiz‐Tagle, A., Mayol-Troncoso, R., Muñoz‐Neira, C., & Núñez-Huasaf, J. (2012) · Revista médica de Chile · doi:10.4067/s0034-98872012000300016 · Cited by 4
Graefe, A. C., & Schultheis, M. T. (2015) · iDEA - Drexel University Institutional Repository · doi:10.17918/etd-6344 · Cited by 3
Wetzel, N., Widmann, A., Schöllkopf, U., Prigge, M., & Krauel, K. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/q3c9e · Cited by 2
Rijmen, J., Senoussi, M., & Wiersema, J. R. (2025) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/10870547251357074 · Cited by 3
Self-citationWagner, D., & Eastwood, J. D. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0332505 · Cited by 2
Zhou, Q., & Luo, Y. (2022) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104262 · Cited by 2
Neurobiological heterogeneity in ADHD
de Zeeuw, P. (2008) · Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · Cited by 2
Peng, C. S., & Wallace, G. L. (2017) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118554470.ch5 · Cited by 2
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Miller, C. J. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-32132-5_218-2 · Cited by 2
ADHD and stress : Diurnal cortisol levels, early psychosocial adversity and perceived stress
Isaksson, J. (2014) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · Cited by 2
Effects of Alertness and Inhibitory Control on Adults with ADHD
Machida, K., & Johnson, K. A. (2023) · Autism and child psychopathology series · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-41709-2_4 · Cited by 1
Kong, Y., Yuan, X., Sun, L., Dang, C., Wang, Y., Huang, J., Guo, J., Jensen, O. B., & Song, Y. (2025) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2025.11.003 · Cited by 1
Attention-Based Performance Validity Assessment in Paediatric Samples
Raasch, E., Christiansen, H., Kneidinger, J., Albrecht, B., & Fuermaier, A. B. M. (2026) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/10731911261452115 · Cited by 1
The neural mechanism of eye movements compensation during self-motion
Zhang, M., & ZHANG, T. (2012) · Chinese Science Bulletin (Chinese Version) · doi:10.1360/972012-711
Oliveros, J. C., & Kreither, J. (2021) · Archivos de Neurociencias · doi:10.31157/archneurosciencesmex.v26i01.210 · Cited by 1
Zulueta, A., Torrano, F., López-Fernández, V., & Crespo-Eguílaz, N. (2019) · Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) · Cited by 1
Research on the Alternate Neurobiological Models of ADHD
Yufei, X. (2020) · International Conference on Public Health and Data Science (ICPHDS) · doi:10.1109/icphds51617.2020.00077 · Cited by 1
Attention and memory in boys with predominantly inattentive and combined subtypes of ADHD
Gomes, L. (2011) · ANU Open Research (Australian National University) · doi:10.25911/5d78dcd6b79f3 · Cited by 1
Wass, S. V. (2017) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/190108 · Cited by 1
Carrier, J.-N. (2013) · Le dépôt institutionnel (Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières)
Conflict-specific Mechanisms of Cognitive Control and their Neural Implementation
München, L.-M.-U. (2013)
Imeraj, L. (2012) · Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University)
Godefroid, E. (2016) · Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University)
Brain State Regulation and RAN/RAS Performance in Primary School Children
Pronina, E. A., Корнеев, А. А., & Akhutina, T. V. (2015)
Kelleher, R. (2018) · NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)
Marx, I., Reis, O., & Berger, C. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027651 · Cited by 1
Meredith, J. E. (2020) · Otago University Research Archive (University of Otago)
Rijmen, J., Driesen, M., Hulsbosch, A., Danckaerts, M., der Oord, S. V., & Wiersema, J. R. (2025) · School Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s12310-025-09753-2
Self-citationKong, Y., Zhou, M., Yuan, X., Luo, X., Huang, J., Li, Y., Yang, L., Wang, Y., Sun, L., Sun, L., et al. (2026) · Child Development · doi:10.1101/2025.11.27.691069
Aguado-Rivas, R., Checa-Ros, A., Fernández-López, L., Tortosa-Pinto, P., Villén, R. G., Contreras‐Chova, F., Fernández-Ibáñez, A., & Molina‐Carballo, A. (2026) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2026.117111
Altered pre-stimulus alpha dynamics index sustained attention difficulties in ADHD.
Rasoulzadeh, V., Buyck, I., & Wiersema, R. (2026) · International Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2026.113401
When Development Falls out of Sync: A Developmental Timing Framework for Learning Disabilities
Leisman, G. (2026) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci16090987
Klein, L. A. (2013) · Cornerstone (Minnesota State University, Mankato)
Mäkelä, L. (2012) · Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University)
Metadata
- Authors
- Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., Wiersema, J. R., van der Meere, J. J., & Roeyers, H.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Sonuga-Barke, Edmund J. S.
- Venue
- Neuropsychology Review
- Published
- 2009-09-15
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 86-102
- ISSN
- 1040-7308 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-6660
- OpenAlex
- W2154741675
- Semantic Scholar
- 7c9cd3b4ec28aa5e0532a9c053845ecfbf2401e5
- Cited by
- 142
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 6.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Neuropsychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (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, delay aversion, impulsivity, delay discounting
- MeSH terms
- Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cognition Disorders, Environment, Humans, Models, Psychological, 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
