CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 240Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Increased intra-individual reaction time variability in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder across response inhibition tasks with different cognitive demands

Open access
Vaurio, Rebecca G., Simmonds, Daniel J., Mostofsky, Stewart H.·2009·Neuropsychologia
DOI 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.01.022PMC PMC4766847
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

One of the most consistent findings in children with ADHD is increased moment-to-moment variability in reaction time (RT). The source of increased RT variability can be examined using ex-Gaussian analyses that divide variability into normal and exponential components and Fast Fourier transform (FFT) that allow for detailed examination of the frequency of responses in the exponential distribution. Prior studies of ADHD using these methods have produced variable results, potentially related to differences in task demand. The present study sought to examine the profile of RT variability in ADHD using two Go/No-go tasks with differing levels of cognitive demand. A total of 140 children (57 with ADHD and 83 typically developing controls), ages 8–13 years, completed both a “simple” Go/No-go task and a more “complex” Go/No-go task with increased working memory load. Repeated measures ANOVA of ex-Gaussian functions revealed for both tasks children with ADHD demonstrated increased variability in both the normal/Gaussian (significantly elevated sigma) and the exponential (significantly elevated tau) components. In contrast, FFT analysis of the exponential component revealed a significant task × diagnosis interaction, such that infrequent slow responses in ADHD differed depending on task demand (i.e., for the simple task, increased power in the 0.027–0.074 Hz frequency band; for the complex task, decreased power in the 0.074–0.202 Hz band). The ex-Gaussian findings revealing increased variability in both the normal (sigma) and exponential (tau) components for the ADHD group, suggest that both impaired response preparation and infrequent “lapses in attention” contribute to increased variability in ADHD. FFT analyses reveal that the periodicity of intermittent lapses of attention in ADHD varies with task demand. The findings provide further support for intra-individual variability as a candidate intermediate endophenotype of ADHD.

Verified 2026-10-06 · 1 reference not checked yet

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.01.022

Cites

46 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 53 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Under conditions requiring at least moderate degrees of response control, children with ADHD show increased variability in both the normal Gaussian (fast) and exponential (slow) components of the reaction time distribution.

    “The results indicate that under conditions requiring at least moderate degrees of response control, children with ADHD show increased variability in both the normal Gaussian (fast”) and exponential (“slow”) components of the reaction time distribution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Children with ADHD demonstrated significantly increased tau compared to controls (M=125.18 vs 102.29).

    “There was also a significant main effect for diagnosis (F[1,138] = 6.98, p = 0.009) with children in the ADHD group demonstrating significantly increased variability in the exponential component (M= 125.18, SD= 50.35) compared to children in the control group (M= 102.29, SD = 50.35).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was no significant task by diagnosis interaction for commission errors.

    “There was no significant task × diagnosis interaction (F[1,138] = 0.93, p = 0.34) (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    FFT analysis indicated that children with ADHD demonstrate greater spectra in the 0.027-0.074 frequency band on the simple Go/No-go task.

    “The results of this analysis indicated that children with ADHD demonstrate greater spectra in the 0.027–0.074 frequency band on the simple Go/No-go task.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The interaction between diagnostic status and task was not significant for CV.

    “Interaction between diagnostic status and task was not significant (F[1,138] = 0.18, p = 0.68).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 32
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On both the simple and complex Go/No-go tasks, ADHD children had greater variability in the normal (sigma) and exponential (tau) components of the reaction time distribution.

    “Repeated measures ANOVA of ex-Gaussian functions revealed for both tasks children with ADHD demonstrated increased variability in both the normal/Gaussian (significantly elevated sigma) and the exponential (significantly elevated tau) components.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Reaction time distributions can be modeled as the sum of a normal component and an independent exponential component.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    FFT analysis of the exponential component showed a task-by-diagnosis interaction: ADHD children had more power in the 0.027-0.074 Hz band on the simple task and less power in the 0.074-0.202 Hz band on the complex task.

    “In contrast, FFT analysis of the exponential component revealed a significant task × diagnosis interaction, such that infrequent slow responses in ADHD differed depending on task demand (i.e., for the simple task, increased power in the 0.027–0.074 Hz frequency band; for the complex task, decreased power in the 0.074–0.202 Hz band).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was no significant task by diagnosis interaction for tau, and no significant effect of ADHD subtype on tau for either task.

    “Task×diagnosis interaction was not significant (F[1,138] = 0.03, p = 0.855). There were no significant effect of ADHD subtype for tau on either the simple (t[1,55] =−0.35, p = 0.73) or complex task (t[1,55] = 0.63, p = 0.53) Fig. 1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a significant main effect of frequency band, with children in both groups showing increased power in the shortest wavelength bands and reduced power across longer wavelength bands.

    “The results indicated significant main effects for band (F[1,138] = 1890.24, p < 0.001). Children in both groups demonstrated increased power in the shortest wavelength bands, and reduced power across longer wavelength bands.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Typically developing children were slightly but not significantly faster on the complex task than on the simple task.

    “while the children in the control group were slightly, but not significantly, faster on the complex task (M = 390.50, SD = 106.68) compared to the simple task (M = 395.62, SD = 109.47) (t = 0.594).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There were no statistically significant differences between ADHD and control groups on WISC-IV Perceptual Reasoning Index or Verbal Comprehension Index scores.

    “WISC-IV VCI and PRI scores were therefore examined as more valid measures of intellectual reasoning in children with ADHD with findings revealing no statistically significant differences between groups for either PRI or VCI score (PRI: F = 3.33, p = 0.07; VCI: F = 2.55, p = 0.11).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There were no significant main effects of diagnostic category or task on mean reaction time.

    “There were no main effects for reaction time (i.e., mean reaction time) for either diagnostic category or task (F[1,138] = 1.30, p = 0.26 and F[1,138] = 1.44, p = 0.23, respectively).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was no significant task by diagnosis interaction for sigma, and no significant effect of ADHD subtype on sigma for either task.

    “Task×diagnosis interaction was not significant (F[1,138] = 0.32, p = 0.57) and there were no significant effect of ADHD subtype on either the simple (t[1,55] = 0.49, p = 0.62) or the complex (t[1,55] = 1.19, p = 0.24).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There were no significant main effects of diagnosis or task on mu, the mean of the normal component of the RT distribution.

    “Analysis of mu, a measure of the mean of the normal component of the normal portion of the distribution, yielded no significant main effect for diagnosis (F[1,138] = 0.07, p = 0.80) or task (F[1,138] = 1.65, p = 0.20).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a nearly significant interaction between diagnosis and task on mu (p=0.056), with controls showing decreased mu on the complex task and increased mu on the simple task, while ADHD children showed slightly increased mu on the complex task.

    “There was a nearly significant interaction between diagnosis and task (F[1,138] = 3.71, p = 0.056), with controls demonstrating decreased values for mu for the complex task, and increased values for mu for the simple task, while children in the ADHD showed slightly increased mu for the complex task compared to the simple task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was no between-group difference in reaction time on the simple Go/No-go task, but children with ADHD showed significantly increased reaction time on the complex Go/No-go task.

    “Specifically, there was no between-group difference in RT on the simple Go/No-go task; however, children with ADHD showed significantly increased RT on the complex Go/No-go task.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For both tasks, children with ADHD showed increased variability in both the fast (sigma) and slow (tau) portions of the RT distribution, despite changing working memory demands.

    “In addition, evaluation of the ex-Gaussian distribution revealed that for both tasks, children with ADHD demonstrated a pattern of increased variability in both the fast (i.e., sigma) and slow (i.e., tau) portions of the distribution, despite changing working memory demands.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    ADHD is a neurobiological disorder.

    “Although the etiology of ADHD is not known, recent research clearly identifies ADHD as a neurobiological disorder (Buitelaar, Montgomery, & van Zwieten-Boot, 2003; Denckla, 2003; Durston, 2003; Tannock, 1998).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Buitelaar, Montgomery, & van Zwieten-Boot, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Denckla, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Durston, 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Children with ADHD had a statistically significantly lower full-scale IQ than typically developing controls (F[1,138]=5.65, p=0.02).

    “There was a statistically significant group difference in FSIQ, with ADHD children having lower FSIQ (M = 111.3, SD = 11.92) than children in the control group (M = 116.2, SD = 11.8) (F[1,138] = 5.65, p = 0.02).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Greater response variability is correlated with impulsive responding and self-reported inattention, which suggests it contributes to ADHD diagnostic features.

    “First, increased variability in responding has been demonstrated to correlate with impulsive responding and self-report of inattention to tasks (Rommelse et al., 2007; Simmonds et al., 2007; Strandburg et al., 1996), suggesting that variability in responding is a contributing factor to expression of diagnostic characteristics of ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Rommelse et al., 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Simmonds et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Strandburg et al., 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the simple GNG task, ADHD children show reduced pre-SMA activation and an anomalous link between pre-SMA activation and intra-subject variability.

    “Consistent with this, fMRI analysis using the simple GNG task reveals that, compared to TD children, children with ADHD show decreased pre-SMA activation (Suskauer, Simmonds, Fotedar et al., 2008) as well as anomalous association between pre-SMA activation and ISV (Suskauer, Simmonds, Caffo et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Suskauer, Simmonds, Fotedar et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Suskauer, Simmonds, Caffo et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Response inhibition deficits occur in children with other developmental disabilities as well, so they may not be specific to ADHD.

    “In addition, children with other developmental disabilities have been shown to demonstrate deficits in response inhibition on some tasks, indicating that this may not be a characteristic specific to children with ADHD (e.g., Johnson et al., 2007a).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Johnson et al., 2007a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The neural substrates of response control depend partly on task demand.

    “Functional imaging findings using these two tasks indicate that the neural substrates of response control are, in some respects, dependent on task demand (Mostofsky et al., 2003).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mostofsky et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Both simple and complex Go/No-go tasks produce no-go-related activation in the rostral supplementary motor area (pre-SMA).

    “For both the simple and the complex Go/No-go tasks, no-go-associated activation was observed in the rostral supplementary motor area (“pre-SMA”), a region important for response selection and control (Isoda & Hikosaka, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Isoda & Hikosaka, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Earlier ADHD studies using ex-Gaussian and FFT methods have yielded inconsistent findings, possibly because of differing task demands.

    “Prior studies of ADHD using these methods have produced variable results, potentially related to differences in task demand.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Evidence on inhibitory control deficits as an ADHD endophenotype is mixed: some studies report more commission errors in ADHD, while others find no group difference.

    “In practice, however, the evidence supporting deficits in inhibitory control as an endophenotype of ADHD have been mixed; some studies find that children with ADHD show high rates of inhibitory failures (commission errors) compared to typically developing (TD) children (e.g., Johnson et al., 2007b; Wodka et al., 2007) while others find no differences in errors between groups (Schulz et al., 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Johnson et al., 2007b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wodka et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Schulz et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In a simple choice reaction time task, ADHD children showed increased tau but not increased sigma.

    “In the first, subjects performed a simple choice response task with minimal demands on response control; children with ADHD showed increased variability in the exponential component (increased tau), but not the normal portion of the distribution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Leth-Steensen et al., 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

    • The authors state this as an assumption: Reaction time distributions can be modeled as the sum of a normal component and an independent exponential component.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In ADHD, intra-subject variability consists of occasional very long reaction times, while most responses are similar to those of comparison groups.

    “Analyses characterizing ISV in ADHD has revealed a pattern of occasional responses with unusually long reaction time, with the majority of responses being comparable to comparison groups (Castellanos et al., 2005; Hervey et al., 2006; Leth-Steensen, King Elbaz, & Douglas, 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Castellanos et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hervey et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Leth-Steensen, King Elbaz, & Douglas, 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The elevated sigma and tau in ADHD suggest that both impaired response preparation and infrequent attentional lapses contribute to the greater reaction time variability.

    “The ex-Gaussian findings revealing increased variability in both the normal (sigma) and exponential (tau) components for the ADHD group, suggest that both impaired response preparation and infrequent “lapses in attention” contribute to increased variability in ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Reaction time distributions can be modeled as the sum of a normal component and an independent exponential component.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The ADHD and control groups did not differ significantly in gender, handedness, race, or age.

    “Groups did not differ significantly in gender distribution (χ2 = 1.78, p = 0.18), handedness (χ2 = 0.178, p = 0.67), racial distribution (χ2 = 2.54, p = 0.47) or age (F = 0.01, p = 0.91).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Full-scale IQ includes measures of working memory and processing speed, domains typically impaired in ADHD, and this is believed to selectively lower FSIQ scores in children with ADHD.

    “FSIQ scores include measures of working memory and processing speed. These domains are typically impaired in individuals with ADHD and it is believed that this selectively lowers FSIQ scores in children with ADHD (Mayes & Calhoun, 2006; Wilcutt, Doyle, Nigg, Faraone, & Pennington, 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Mayes & Calhoun, 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wilcutt, Doyle, Nigg, Faraone, & Pennington, 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    A strength of the study was the use of two methods, ex-Gaussian and FFT analysis, to evaluate intra-individual variability in children with ADHD compared with typically developing controls during two separate tasks requiring controlled responding.

    “A strength of the present study was the use of two methods, ex-Gaussian and FFT analysis, to evaluate intra-individual variability in children with ADHD compared with TD controls during two separate tasks that required controlled responding.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Typically developing children appeared to speed or slow their responding more frequently in order to maximize efficiency and accuracy on the task.

    “In other words, it appeared that the TD children were speeding or slowing their responding more frequently in order to maximize their efficiency and accuracy in the task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Studies of mean reaction time in ADHD have shown mixed results, with some finding slower RT and others finding no differences depending on diagnostic subtype.

    “Examination of mean RT in ADHD have demonstrated mixed results, with some showing children with ADHD have significantly slower RT (e.g., Tamm, Menon, Ringel, & Reiss, 2004) while others show no differences depending on ADHD diagnostic subtype (e.g., Derefinko et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Tamm, Menon, Ringel, & Reiss, 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Derefinko et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    This pattern was observed regardless of working memory demand, suggesting that abnormalities in systems critical to engaging a state of preparedness to respond may be central to the neural basis of ADHD.

    “This pattern was observed regardless of working memory demand, suggesting that abnormalities in systems critical engaging a state of preparedness to respond may be central to the neural basis of ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Some task-specific changes in variability in the slow portion of the distribution for children with ADHD were revealed by finer-grained FFT analysis, suggesting that neural contributions to infrequent lapses of attention in ADHD may be more task-dependent.

    “Some task-specific changes in variability in the slow portion of the distribution for children with ADHD were revealed using finer grained FFT analysis of the periodicity of reaction time, suggesting that neural contributions to infrequent lapses of attention in ADHD may be more task-dependent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Increased variability in ADHD, like impaired inhibitory control, appears to be a stable feature that is independent of the effect of other cognitive/executive domains.

    “The pattern of findings, which is consistent with that seen for commission rate (Wodka et al., 2007), suggest that increased variability in ADHD, like impaired inhibitory control, appears to be a stable feature that is independent of the effect of other cognitive/executive domains.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wodka et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Taken together, intra-individual variability appears to be a stable trait directly related to inefficient response preparation mechanisms.

    “Taken together, it appears that ISV is a stable trait directly related to inefficient response preparation mechanisms.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The frequencies that can be evaluated using FFT are limited by the intervals at which stimuli are presented; in this study the shortest band was 0.074-0.202 Hz (5-15 s), so FFT can evaluate slower variability (tau) but not more rapid variability.

    “It is important to note, however, that the frequencies that can be evaluated using this method are limited by the intervals at which stimuli are presented. In this study, the shortest frequency band was 0.074–0.202 Hz, a duration of 5–15 s. As such, FFT is useful in evaluating variability in the slower portion of the RT distribution (i.e., tau), but cannot provide analysis of more rapid variabilit”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Abnormalities in pre-SMA circuits important for response selection and preparation may contribute to ADHD-associated difficulties with response control, reflected as impaired response inhibition and increased variability in responding.

    “It may be that abnormalities in pre-SMA circuits, important for response selection and preparation, contribute to ADHD-associated difficulties with response control, reflected as impaired response inhibition and increased variability in responding.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This pattern of increased variability does not appear to correlate directly to any demand of the task and therefore likely represents inefficiency in meeting task demands.

    “This does not appear to correlate directly to any demand of the task, and therefore likely represents inefficiency in meeting task demands.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Intra-individual variability is a good candidate for an intermediate endophenotypic trait that can be used in future studies to refine understanding of genetic and physiological mechanisms associated with response preparation and ADHD.

    “As such, it is a good candidate for an intermediate endophenotypic trait that can be used in future studies to further refine our understanding of the relationship between genetic and physiological mechanisms associated with response preparation and ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The rostral pre-SMA is critical to response selection, and activation in this region predicts lower intra-individual variability in typically developing children but not in children with ADHD.

    “The SMA, in particular the rostral “pre-SMA”, has been shown to be critical to response selection (Isoda and Hikosaka, 2007) and recent fMRI findings reveal that activation in this region is predictive of lower ISV for TD children (Suskauer, Simmonds, Fotedar et al., 2008), but not children with ADHD (Suskauer, Simmonds, Caffo et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Isoda and Hikosaka, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Suskauer, Simmonds, Fotedar et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Suskauer, Simmonds, Caffo et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Under conditions requiring higher degrees of response control, increased variability in ADHD is present throughout the RT distribution, regardless of ADHD subtype, reflecting inefficiency in neural mechanisms critical to engaging a state of preparedness to respond.

    “However, our findings and those generated by Hervey et al. (2006) indicate that under conditions requiring higher degrees of response control, increased variability in ADHD is present throughout the RT distribution, regardless of ADHD subtype, reflecting inefficiency in neural mechanisms critical to engaging a state of preparedness to respond.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hervey et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

39 of 39

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Reaction time distributions can be modeled as the sum of a normal component and an independent exponential component.

    “This model posits that the distribution of reaction times can be represented as the sum of a normal (Gaussian) distribution of response times and an independent exponentially distributed variable (Leth-Steensen et al., 2000).”
1 of 1

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?

  • Research using ex-Gaussian parameters has shown that ADHD-related reaction time variability is largely due to an elevation in tau.

    “Research using ex-Gaussian parameters has shown that ADHD-related RTV is largely the result of an elevation in tau [10,13,32].”

    From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [13]

  • Very few studies have examined the periodicity of long reaction times, and their results are mixed regarding the frequency at which long reaction times occur.

    “Unfortunately, there have been very few studies that have examined the periodicity of long RTs, and results from these studies have been mixed in regard to the frequency at which long RTs occur [9,13,35,46].”

    From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [13]

  • In general, FFT analyses of ADHD studies found that the ADHD group differed from controls because of increased power in the frequency band reflecting periodic cycles about every 10-20 seconds, which increases variance of the reaction-time distribution.

    “In general, FFT analyses of these studies revealed that the ADHD group differed from the controls owing to an increase in power in the frequency band reflecting periodic cycles about every 10-20 s (as hypothesized by Castellanos) that increase variance of the RT distribution.”

    From Understanding the Effects of Stimulant Medications on Cognition in Individuals with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Decade of Progress (2011) · cites this paper as Vaurio et al (2009)

Self-check

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

  • Simple-task cue counts do not match the stated ratio

    Minor

    The reported 173 go cues and 44 no-go cues give a go-to-no-go ratio of about 3.93:1, not 3:1.

    Reported 3 · recomputed 3.931818

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Vaurio, R. G., Simmonds, D. J., & Mostofsky, S. H.
Affiliations
  • Kennedy Krieger Institute (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Vaurio, Rebecca G.
ORCID
Mostofsky, Stewart H.
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-10
Volume
47
Issue
12
Pages
2389-2396
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.01.022
PMC
PMC4766847
OpenAlex
W1991798518
Semantic Scholar
234b0b2b0abca5a0d5dc9dfb0fa4a34049db9974
Cited by
240
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 23
FWCI
10.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH085328)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K02NS044850, R01NS048527)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025005)
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, reaction time variability, response inhibition, go/no-go task, working memory load, task demands, attentional lapses, response preparation, slow response, endophenotypes, children
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Cognition Disorders, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Reaction Time, Spectrum Analysis, Normal Distribution

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 by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

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