Cited by 82Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Does response variability predict distractibility among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder?

Open access
Adams, Zachary W., Roberts, Walter M., Milich, Richard, Fillmore, Mark T.·2011·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Increased intraindividual variability in response time (RTSD) has been observed reliably in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and has often been used as a measure of inattention. RTSD is assumed to reflect attentional lapses and distractibility, though evidence for the validity of this connection is lacking. We assessed whether RTSD is an indicator of inattention by comparing RTSD on the stop-signal task (SST) with performance on the delayed oculomotor response (DOR) task, a measure of distractibility. Participants included 30 adults with ADHD and 28 controls. Participants completed the SST and the DOR task, which measured subjects' ability to maintain attention and avoid distraction by inhibiting reflexive saccades toward distractors. On the SST, the ADHD group was slower to inhibit than were controls, indicating poorer inhibitory control in ADHD. The ADHD group also displayed slower reaction times (RTs), greater RTSD, and more omission errors. On the DOR task, the ADHD group displayed more premature saccades (i.e., greater distractibility) than did controls. Greater variability in RT was associated with increased distraction on the DOR task, but only in ADHD participants. Results suggest that RTSD is linked to distractibility among adults with ADHD and support the use of RTSD as a valid measure of inattention in ADHD.

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 · 10.1037/a0022112

Cites

90 of 90 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?

  • Increased reaction time variability has been documented in both pediatric and adult ADHD samples.

    “In addition, increased RTV has been documented in both pediatric [16,17] and adult ADHD samples [18,19].”

    From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [18]

  • Reaction time standard deviation almost always correlates highly with mean reaction time, making speed and variability difficult to distinguish.

    “Unfortunately, RTSD almost always correlates quite highly (e.g., r00.90; [17]) with the mean reaction time [18,40,41] that 1 cannot distinguish speed and variability limiting the clarity of the psychological or neurophysiological interpretation.”

    From Reaction Time Variability in ADHD: A Review (2012) · cites this paper as [18]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Marzi CA Denes G Pizzamiglio L Neuropsychology of attention Handbook of clinical and experimental neuropsychology 1999 509 524 Psychology Press Hove, East Sussex, UK
  2. Shimojo S Hikosaka O Miyauchi S Daniel G Koriat A Automatic and controlled attention detected by the line motion effect Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application 1999 145 163 MIT Press Cambridge, MA
  3. Taylor TL Klein RM On the causes and effects of inhibition of return Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1998 5 625 643
  4. Weiss M Hechtman LT Weiss G ADHD in adulthood: A guide to current theory, diagnosis, and treatment 1999 The Johns Hopkins University Press Baltimore, MD

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adams, Z. W., Roberts, W. M., Milich, R., & Fillmore, M. T.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2011
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
427-436
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W1971681873
Cited by
82
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UKnowledge (University of Kentucky) (submittedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA021027; DA005312)
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, distractibility, inattention, stop-signal task, inhibitory control, adult ADHD, reaction time
MeSH terms
Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Eye Movements, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Reaction Time, Reproducibility of Results, Eye Movement Measurements, Young Adult

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