Cited by 312Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Executive functions and ADHD in adults: evidence for selective effects on ADHD symptom domains

Nigg, Joel T., Stavro, Gillian, Ettenhofer, Mark, Hambrick, David Z., Miller, Torri, Henderson, John M.·2005·Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Abstract

Dual-process models of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) suggest that both executive functioning and regulatory functions (e.g., processing speed) are involved and that executive function weaknesses may be associated specifically with symptoms of inattention-disorganization but not hyperactivity-impulsivity. Adults aged 18-37 (105 with ADHD, 90 controls) completed a neuropsychological battery. The ADHD group had weaker performance than did the control group (p<.01) on both executive and speed measures. Symptoms of inattention-disorganization were uniquely related to executive functioning with hyperactivity-impulsivity controlled. Inattention was associated with slower response speed, and hyperactivity-impulsivity with faster output speed. Results were not accounted for by IQ, age, gender, education level, or comorbid disorders. Findings are discussed in terms of developmental and dual-process models of ADHD leading into adulthood.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-843x.114.3.706

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • There is considerable heterogeneity in cognitive impairments in ADHD, with some patients not showing impairments or only in some cognitive domains.

    “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).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 80 · Cited by 312

Authors
Nigg, J. T., Stavro, G., Ettenhofer, M., Hambrick, D. Z., Miller, T., & Henderson, J. M.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Published
2005-11
Volume
114
Issue
4
Pages
706-717
ISSN
  • 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1846
OpenAlex
W2146964018
Cited by
312
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 18
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH63146, R01MH063146)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
adult ADHD, executive function, dual-process models, hyperactivity/impulsivity, processing speed, response speed, symptom domains
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Severity of Illness Index

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