Cited by 227Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The structure of cognition in 9 and 10 year-old children and associations with problem behaviors: Findings from the ABCD study’s baseline neurocognitive battery

Open access
Thompson, Wesley K., Barch, Deanna M., Bjork, James M., Gonzalez, Raul, Nagel, Bonnie J., Nixon, Sara Jo, Luciana, Monica·2019·Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study is poised to be the largest single-cohort long-term longitudinal study of neurodevelopment and child health in the United States. Baseline data on N= 4521 children aged 9-10 were released for public access on November 2, 2018. In this paper we performed principal component analyses of the neurocognitive assessments administered to the baseline sample. The neurocognitive battery included seven measures from the NIH Toolbox as well as five other tasks. We implemented a Bayesian Probabilistic Principal Components Analysis (BPPCA) model that incorporated nesting of subjects within families and within data collection sites. We extracted varimax-rotated component scores from a three-component model and associated these scores with parent-rated Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) internalizing, externalizing, and stress reactivity. We found evidence for three broad components that encompass general cognitive ability, executive function, and learning/memory. These were significantly associated with CBCL scores in a differential manner but with small effect sizes. These findings set the stage for longitudinal analysis of neurocognitive and psychopathological data from the ABCD cohort as they age into the period of maximal adolescent risk-taking.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.dcn.2018.12.004

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 study recruited children from schools throughout the United States based on stratified probability to match the demographic and socioeconomic diversity of the United States.

    “The study recruited children from schools throughout the United States based on stratified probability38 to match the demographic and socioeconomic diversity of the United States.39”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thompson, W. K., Barch, D. M., Bjork, J. M., Gonzalez, R., Nagel, B. J., Nixon, S. J., & Luciana, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Luciana, Monica
Venue
Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
36
Pages
100606
ISSN
1878-9293 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2904226249
Cited by
227
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1
FWCI
7.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Florida International University Digital Commons (Florida International University) (submittedVersion)
  • Florida International University Digital Commons (Florida International University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01DA041148, U01DA041106, 1U24DA041123-01, U01DA041120, U01 DA041156)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
cognitive structure, neuropsychological assessment, executive function, learning and memory, general intelligence, behavioral problems, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, stress reactivity, Child Behavior Checklist, Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, children aged 9-10, NIH Toolbox
MeSH terms
Problem Behavior, Adolescent, Brain, Child, Cognition, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Neurocognitive Disorders, Adolescent Development

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