CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 108Coffee research and impactsAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations

Caffeine effects on learning, performance, and anxiety in normal school‐age children

BERNSTEIN, GAIL A., CARROLL, MARILYN E., CROSBY, ROSS D., PERWIEN, AMY R., GO, FRANCES S., BENOWITZ, NEAL L.·1994·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
DOI 10.1097/00004583-199403000-00016
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this investigation was to study the acute effects of caffeine on learning, performance, and anxiety in normal prepubertal children.Method Twenty-one children were evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover design. Subjects were studied during four sessions, 1 week apart, under the following conditions: baseline, placebo, 2.5 mg/kg caffeine, and 5.0 mg/kg caffeine. Subjects were randomized to order of placebo and the two dosages of caffeine. Dependent measures included tests of attention, manual dexterity, short-term memory, and processing speed. Anxiety rating scales were also administered. Saliva samples were analyzed for caffeine levels.Results Caffeine improved performance on two of four measures of the Test of Variables of Attention and on a test of manual dexterity in the dominant hand. There was a trend toward increased current level of self-reported anxiety after caffeine on a visual analogue measure of anxiety. Children reported feeling significantly less "sluggish" after caffeine ingestion than after placebo ingestion.Conclusions In a small sample size, there was indication that caffeine enhanced performance on a test of attention and on a motor task. Children also reported feeling less "sluggish" but somewhat more anxious. Because caffeine is so widely available and frequently consumed by children, these results are important and need replication.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00004583-199403000-00016

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • In a study of children, caffeine intake was not significantly associated with any measures of self-reported anxiety, whereas a significant linear association was reported between caffeine concentrations in saliva and the anxiety state item in the VAA-R scale only.

    “Caffeine intake was not significantly associated with any of these measures of self-reported anxiety, whereas a significant linear association was reported between caffeine concentrations in saliva and the anxiety state item in the VAA-R scale only.”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Bernstein et al., 1994

  • The Panel notes that caffeine intakes were not significantly associated with anxiety, and that caffeine concentrations in saliva were generally not associated with self-reported measures of anxiety in the Bernstein et al. study.

    “The Panel notes that caffeine intakes were not significantly associated with anxiety, and that caffeine concentrations in saliva were generally not associated with self-reported measures of anxiety in this study.”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Bernstein et al., 1994

  • The Panel notes that the studies do not show an effect of single doses of caffeine ranging from 2.5 to 10 mg/kg body weight on most self-reported measures of anxiety in children.

    “The Panel notes that these studies (Elkins et al., 1981;Rapoport et al., 1981b;Bernstein et al., 1994) do not show an effect of single doses of caffeine ranging from 2.5 to 10 mg/kg bw on most selfreported measures of anxiety in children.”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Bernstein et al., 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
BERNSTEIN, G. A., CARROLL, M. E., CROSBY, R. D., PERWIEN, A. R., GO, F. S., & BENOWITZ, N. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • San Francisco General Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
CARROLL, MARILYN E.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1994-03
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
407-415
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00004583-199403000-00016
OpenAlex
W2019483208
Cited by
108
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 9
FWCI
0.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p50da001696-18)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA R37 DA03240, P01DA008131, R37DA003240, NIDA DAO1696, P01-DA-08131)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Keywords
caffeine, children, attention, manual dexterity, short-term memory, processing speed, anxiety, cognitive performance, prepubertal children, caffeine dose-response
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Caffeine, Child, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Learning, Psychometrics, Saliva, 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