CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 231Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Task Switching and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Cepeda, Nicholas J., Cepeda, Manuel L., Kramer, Arthur F.·2000·Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
DOI 10.1023/a:1005143419092
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The main goal of the present set of studies was to examine the efficiency of executive control processes and, more specifically, the control processes involved in task set inhibition and preparation to perform a new task in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and non-ADHD children. This was accomplished by having ADHD children, both on and off medication, and non-ADHD children perform the task-switching paradigm, which involves the performance of two simple tasks. In nonswitch trials, an individual task is performed repeatedly for a number of trials. In switch trials, subjects must rapidly and accurately switch from one task to the other, either in a predictable or unpredictable sequence. Switch costs are calculated by subtracting performance on the nonswitch trials from performance on the switch trials. These costs are assumed to reflect the executive control processes required for the coordination of multiple tasks. ADHD children showed substantially larger switch costs than non-ADHD children. However, when on medication, the ADHD children's switch performance was equivalent to control children. In addition, medication was observed to improve the ADHD children's ability to inhibit inappropriate responses. These data are discussed in terms of models of ADHD and cognition.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1005143419092

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Children with ADHD appear mainly challenged by switch paradigms, not by the ID/ED task.

    “However, the discrepancies in cognitive flexibility findings might not be so straight forward because ADHD children seem to be primarily challenged on switch paradigms [70,71] but not on the ID/ED task [29,32,34,35].”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [70]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  2. Anderson, S. W., Damasio, H., Jones, R. D., & Tranel, D. (1991). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance as a measure of frontal lobe damage. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 13, 909–922. · DOI
  3. Barkley, R. A. Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. In E. J. Mash & R. A. Barkley (Eds.), Treatment of Childhood Disorders (pp. 39–72). New York: Guilford Press.
  4. Barkley, R. A., & Grodzinsky, G. M. (1994). Are tests of frontal lobe functions useful in the diagnosis of attention deficit disorders? The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 8, 121–139. · DOI
  5. Barkley, R. A., Murphy, K. R., & Kwasnik, D. (1996). Psychological adjustment and adaptive impairments in young adults with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 1, 41–54. · DOI
  6. Berg, E. (1948). A simple objective test for measuring flexibility in thinking. Journal of General Psychology, 39, 15–22. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Berman, K. F., Ostrem, J. L., Randolph, C., Gold, J., Goldberg, T. E., Coppola, R., Carson, R. E., Herscovitch, P., & Weinberger, D. R. (1995). Physiological activation of a cortical network during performance of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: A positron emission tomography study. Neuropsychologia, 33, 1027–1046. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Coles, M. G. H., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 529–553.
  9. Douglas, V. I. (1983). Attentional and cognitive problems. In M. Rutter (Ed.), Developmental Neuropsychiatry (pp. 280–329). New York: Guilford.
  10. Douglas, V. I. (1988). Cognitive deficits in children with attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity. In L. M. Bloomingdale & J. A. Sergeant (Eds.), Attention deficit disorder: Criteria, cognition, intervention (pp. 65–82). London: Pergamon Press.
  11. Drewe, E. (1974). The effect of type and area of brain lesion on Wisconsin Card Sorting performance. Cortex, 10, 159–170. · DOI
  12. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Bernzweig, J., Karbon, M., Poulin, R., & Hanish, L. (1993). The relations of emotionality and regulation to preschoolers' social skills and sociometric status. Child Development, 64, 1418–1438. · DOI
  13. Eriksen, C., Coles, M. G. H., Morris, L., & O'Hara, W. (1985). An electromyographic examination of response competition. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 23, 165–168. · DOI
  14. Gopher, D. (1996). Attentional control: Explorations of the work of an executive controller. Cognitive Brain Research, 5, 23–38. · DOI
  15. Heaton, R. (1981). A manual for the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  16. Kramer, A. F., Hahn, S., & Gopher, D. (1999). Task coordination and aging: Explorations of executive control processes in the task switching paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 101, 339–378. · DOI
  17. Kramer, A. F., Humphrey, D. G., Larish, J. F., Logan, G. D., & Strayer, D. L. (1994). Aging and inhibition: Beyond a unitary view of inhibitory processing in attention. Psychology and Aging, 9, 491–512. · DOI
  18. Lou, H. C., Henriksen, L., Bruhn, P., Borner, H., & Nielsen, J. B. (1989). Striatal dysfunction in attention deficit and hyperkinetic disorder. Archives of Neurology, 46, 825–829.
  19. Meyer, D. E., & Karis, D. (1997). A computational theory of executive control processes and multiple-task performance: Part I. Basic Mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3–65. · DOI
  20. Merian, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.
  21. Milner, B. (1963). Effects of different brain lesions on card sorting. Archives of Neurology, 9, 90–100. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Neill, T. W., & Valdes, L. A. (1996). Facilitatory and inhibitory aspects of attention. In A. F. Kramer, M. G. H. Coles & G. D. Logan (Eds.), Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pages, 77–106). Washington, DC: APA Press. · DOI
  23. Norman, D., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation. New York: Plenum Press.
  24. Pelham, W. E., & Bender, M. E. (1982). Peer relationships in hyperactive children: Description and treatment. In K. D. Gadow & I. Bialer (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 365–436). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  25. Quay, H. C. (1988). Attention deficit disorder and the behavioral inhibition system: The relevance of the neuropsychological theory of Jeffrey A. Gray. In L. M. Bloomingdale & J. Sergeant (Eds.), Attention deficit disorder: Criteria, cognition, intervention (pp. 117–126). NY: Pergamon Press.
  26. Rosenbaum, M., & Baker, E. (1984). Self-controlled behavior in hyperactive and nonhyperactive children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 12, 303–318. · DOI
  27. Rubinstein, J., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (in press). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
  28. Schachar, R. J., Tannock, R., & Logan, G. (1993). Inhibitory control, impulsiveness, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Clinical Psychology Review, 13, 721–739. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Schachar, R., Tannock, R., Marriott, M., & Logan, G. (1995). Deficient inhibitory control in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23, 411–437. · DOI
  30. Sergeant, J. A., & Scholter, C. A. (1985). On resource strategy limitations in hyperactivity: Cognitive impulsivity reconsidered. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 26(1), 97–109. · DOI
  31. Sergeant, J. A. (1996). A theory of attention: An information processing perspective. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory and executive function, (pages 57–69). Baltimore: Brooks.
  32. Shallice, T. (1994). Multiple levels of control processes. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and Performance XV. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Press.
  33. Sternberg, G. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276–315. · DOI · Paper page
  34. Sieg, K. G., Gaffney, G. R., Preston, D. F., & Hellings, J. A. (1995). SPEC brain imaging abnormalities in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Clinical Nuclear Medicine, 20, 55–60. · DOI
  35. Tannock, R., Schachar, R., Carr, R., Chajczyk, D., & Logan, G. (1989). Effects of methylphenidate on inhibitory control in hyperactive children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 17, 473–491. · DOI
  36. Tannock, R., Schachar, R., & Logan, G. (1995). Methylphendiate and cognitive flexibility: Dissociated dose effects in hyperactive children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23, 235–266. · DOI
  37. Zentall, S. S. (1985). A context for hyperactivity. In K. D. Gadow & I. Bialer (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (vol 4., pages 273–343). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cepeda, N. J., Cepeda, M. L., & Kramer, A. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of South Alabama (US)
ORCID
Kramer, Arthur F.
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2000-06
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
213-226
ISSN
  • 0091-0627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2835
DOI
10.1023/a:1005143419092
OpenAlex
W1557440383
Cited by
231
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
FWCI
2.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ag012203-03)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01 AG12203)
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, task switching, executive function, switch costs, ADHD medication, children, response inhibition, task preparation
MeSH terms
Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Child Development, Cognition, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Mental Processes, Task Performance and Analysis

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