The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 16 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms
Open accessAbstract
Background: Deficits in time perception (the ability to judge the duration of time intervals) have been found in children with both attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and dyslexia. This paper investigates time perception, phonological skills and executive functions in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms (AS). Method: Children with dyslexia‐only ( n = 17), AS‐only ( n = 17), comorbid dyslexia+AS ( n = 25), and typically developing controls ( n = 42), matched for age and non‐verbal ability, were assessed on measures of phonological skills, executive function and time perception (duration discrimination and time reproduction). Results: Children with dyslexia were impaired on measures of phonological skill and duration discrimination compared to children without dyslexia (though problems on duration discrimination appeared to be attributable to mild symptoms of inattention in this group). In contrast, children with AS exhibited impairments on measures of both time perception and executive function compared to children without AS. Children with dyslexia+AS showed an additive combination of the deficits associated with dyslexia‐only and AS‐only. Conclusions: Dyslexia and AS appear to be associated with distinct patterns of cognitive deficit, which are present in combination in children with dyslexia+AS.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms (AS) showed distinct cognitive profiles: dyslexia was linked to phonological deficits, while AS was linked to executive-function and time-perception deficits. Comorbid dyslexia+AS showed an additive combination of both profiles rather than more severe or unique deficits.
Key findings
- Dyslexia was associated with poorer phonological skills: significant main effects on phoneme deletion (F = 9.11, p < .01, ηp² = .09), nonword repetition (F = 9.15, p < .01, ηp² = .09), phonemic decoding (F = 32.62, p < .01, ηp² = .26), and digit recall (F = 5.26, p < .05, ηp² = .05).
- AS was associated with executive-function/attention weaknesses: significant main effects on response variability (SDRT: F = 9.37, p < .01, ηp² = .10), listening recall (F = 4.72, p < .05, ηp² = .05), block recall (F = 3.95, p < .05, ηp² = .04), and sustained attention (Score!: F = 8.52, p < .01, ηp² = .09).
- Time perception was impaired in both conditions: duration discrimination showed significant main effects of dyslexia (F = 5.10, p < .05, ηp² = .05) and AS (F = 4.00, p < .05, ηp² = .04); time reproduction error showed a significant AS main effect (F = 6.38, p < .05, ηp² = .07).
- In a regression predicting duration discrimination thresholds (n = 98), inattention was the only unique predictor (unique R² = .05, p < .05); hyperactivity/impulsivity and literacy difficulty did not predict additional unique variance (R² = .00 and .01), with overall R² = .11.
Methods
- Four groups of children aged 5.58–14.75 years (mean = 10.23, SD = 2.24) participated: dyslexia-only (n = 17), AS-only (n = 17), dyslexia+AS (n = 25), and typically developing controls (n = 42), matched for age and non-verbal ability.
- Children completed measures of phonological skills (phoneme deletion, CNRep, phonemic decoding, digit recall), executive function (SSRT task, listening recall, block recall, Score!), and time perception (duration discrimination and time reproduction).
- Analyses used 2 × 2 (dyslexia ± × AS ±) ANOVAs, planned comparisons, mixed ANOVA for time reproduction, and a simultaneous regression predicting duration discrimination from inattention, hyperactivity, and literacy difficulty.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: the lack of a diagnostic assessment of ADHD, including evidence of persistence and impairment, may restrict generalisability to other ADHD samples.
- Stated in the paper: the study included just one measure of visuo-spatial memory (Block Recall), and other more attentionally demanding visuo-spatial memory tasks were not included.
- Evident from the text: the AS group combined children with a prior clinical ADHD diagnosis (n = 15) and children recruited on parent/teacher concerns without a clinical diagnosis (n = 27); parent and teacher ratings were not available for all children, and two hyperactive/impulsive-only children were excluded from analyses.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
36 Own result · 15 Own method · 13 Own interpretation · 12 Not checked yet · 1 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, children with AS exhibited impairments on measures of both time perception and executive function compared to children without AS.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with dyslexia were impaired on measures of phonological skill and duration discrimination compared to children without dyslexia”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with dyslexia were impaired on measures of phonological skill and duration discrimination compared to children without dyslexia”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, children with AS exhibited impairments on measures of both time perception and executive function compared to children without AS.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with dyslexia+AS showed an additive combination of the deficits associated with dyslexia-only and AS-only.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was also a strong trend for the dyslexia+AS group to perform worse than the dyslexia-only group on the Score! test (t (40) = 1.89, p = .07; d = .59).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Executive function
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together measures of inattention, hyperactivity and composite literacy difficulty scores accounted for 11% of the variance in duration discrimination thresholds.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Dimensional analyses
plaincorrelationaln = 98- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with dyslexia+AS made significantly more errors than children with dyslexia-only (t (16) = 3.70, p < .01)”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were also non-significant trends for children with AS to show longer SSRTs (reflecting weaker inhibition) compared to children without AS.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Executive function
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The magnitude of absolute errors increased as the target duration increased (F (2.86, 254.45) = 39.78, p < .01, ηp2 = .31)”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
- Probably not a substantial claim. 9
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and neither hyperactivity/impulsivity nor literacy predicted additional unique variance (r2 = .00 and .01, respectively).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Dimensional analyses
plainn = 98- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, although children with a diagnosis of ADHD tended to be rated by parents as showing more symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity than children without a diagnosis, overall teacher ratings did not significantly differ between the groups and both groups were rated as having significantly more symptoms of ADHD than TD-controls”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Participants
hedgedcorrelationaln = 42- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but none of the interactions between target duration and either dyslexia or AS were significant (all Fs < 1).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the children with AS (n = 42), 15 had previously received a clinical diagnosis of ADHD combined-type, in the absence of any other comorbid diagnosis, by an experienced multidisciplinary CAMHS team.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Participants
plainn = 42- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As expected, there were significant main effects of dyslexia but not AS on all the measures of phonological skill (phoneme deletion, nonword repetition, phonemic decoding and digit recall)”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“Consistent with our hypotheses, children with dyslexia showed weaknesses on measures of phoneme deletion, nonword repetition, nonword reading and phonological memory.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Phonological skills
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which appears to reflect the fact that the comorbid dyslexia+AS group actually perform slightly, but non-significantly, better than the dyslexia-only group on this task.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Phonological skills
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with dyslexia-only and AS-only performed similarly and less well than TD-controls on the duration discrimination task.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were significant main effects of dyslexia and AS but no significant interaction.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Children with AS made large errors on the time reproduction task and showed deficits in duration discrimination.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was no significant main effect of dyslexia and no significant interaction.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is widely accepted that the proximal cognitive cause of dyslexia is a phonological deficit (Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004)”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Arguably, the pattern of findings just described (that dyslexia-only and ADHD-only are associated with different patterns of cognitive impairment but both forms of impairment co-occur in the comorbid condition) is consistent with this hypothesis.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Conclusions
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“whereas the predominant account of ADHD sees it as arising from an impairment in executive functions that affects both cognitive and motivational systems (Barkley, 1997).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Abstract > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barkley, 1997
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Dyslexia was associated with deficits in phonological skills (phonological awareness, phonological memory and decoding) whereas AS was associated with increased response variability, deficits in attention and in visuo-spatial short-term memory (STM)”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“They also failed to provide support for the ‘cognitive subtype’ hypothesis (e.g., de Jong et al., 2006; Rucklidge & Tannock, 2002) because children with dyslexia+AS exhibited neither different, nor more severe, deficits than children with either pure condition.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites de Jong et al., 2006
- Not checked yetcites Rucklidge & Tannock, 2002
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mean probability of responding (not inhibiting) on a stop-signal trial was .52, indicating that the tracking algorithm succeeded.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Tests and procedures
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Slightly poor duration discrimination also characterised children with dyslexia, probably reflecting mild impairments of attention in this group.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Since children with dyslexia+AS performed poorly on measures of executive function as well as on phonological tasks, our findings refute the ‘phenocopy’ hypothesis (Pennington et al., 1993).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pennington et al., 1993
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that the lack of a diagnostic assessment of ADHD, which includes evidence of persistence and impairment, is a limitation in this study and may restrict the generalisability of the results to other ADHD samples.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mean probability of responding (not inhibiting) on a stop-signal trial was .52, indicating that the tracking algorithm succeeded.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Tests and procedures
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three children with AS-only, 5 with dyslexia+AS and 3 TD-controls displayed extreme performance on the duration discrimination (either because of very good or very poor performance).”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Data treatment
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings suggest that the children with dyslexia-only and AS-only exhibited mild symptoms of the other disorder, even though they did not meet our criteria for classification.”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Participants
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The children classified as having ADHD symptoms (AS) based on rating scales have ADHD as intended, despite the lack of a diagnostic assessment.
“The number of inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive symptoms associated with the child’s highest overall ADHD rating was used as a measure of AS”
“the lack of a diagnostic assessment of ADHD, which includes evidence of persistence and impairment, is a limitation in this study”
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“accumulating evidence indicates that timing functions are impaired in a variety of developmental disorders including ADHD [32,33], dyslexia [34], and autism [35,36].”
From The Conceptual and Methodological Mayhem of “Screen Time” (2020) · cites this paper as [34]
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“t (15) = 2.82, p < .01”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Time perception
Reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .013
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upt(15) = 2.82reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .013
“t (15) = 2.82, p < .01”
- Consistentt(39) = 2.39reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .022
“t (39) = 2.39, p < .05”
- Consistentt(40) = 1.89reported p = .07 · recomputed p = .066
“t (40) = 1.89, p = .07”
- Consistentt(40) = 1.63reported p = .11 · recomputed p = .111
“t (40) = 1.63, p = .11”
- Consistentt(40) = 2.03reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .049
“t (40) = 2.03, p < .05”
- Consistentt(16) = 3.7reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .002
“t (16) = 3.70, p < .01”
- Consistentt(40) = 0.43reported p = .67 · recomputed p = .670
“t (40) = .43, p = .67”
- ConsistentF(2.86, 254.45) = 39.78reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“F (2.86, 254.45) = 39.78, p < .01”
- Consistentt(40) = 1.47reported p = .15 · recomputed p = .149
“t (40) = 1.47, p = .15”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| MRT (ms) | 653.97 | 172.58 | 35 | 663.72 | 142.19 | 17 | 726.93 | 174.30 | 17 | 685.42 | 171.46 | 24 | .19 | .00 | 1.70 | .02 | .50 | .01 |”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Data treatment
Reported 336.47 · recomputed 302.66
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Tests and procedures
“There were 24 items, and deletion of the specified phoneme always resulted in a word”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Data treatment
“| Phoneme deletion (18) | 13.31 | 3.80 | 42 | 10.53 | 4.09 | 17 | 11.94 | 4.13 | 17 | 9.76 | 3.59 | 25 | 9.11** | .09 | 1.69 | .02 | .13 | .00 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Method > Tests and procedures
“The mean probability of responding (not inhibiting) on a stop-signal trial was .52”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Data treatment
“| Probability of inhibition | .54 | .08 | 35 | .54 | .10 | 17 | .53 | .14 | 17 | .51 | .12 | 24 | .12 | .00 | .86 | .01 | .02 | .00 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Data treatment
“| Digit recall (54) | 29.98 | 4.42 | 40 | 26.47 | 4.23 | 17 | 39.00 | 6.59 | 17 | 27.84 | 4.14 | 25 | 5.26* | .05 | .04 | .00 | 1.33 | .01 |”
§ Time perception, phonological skills and executive function in children with dyslexia and/or ADHD symptoms > Results > Phonological skills
“there were significant main effects of dyslexia but not AS on all the measures of phonological skill”
Citations
Cites
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note
Goodman, R. (1997) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x · Cited by 14,908 · cited 2×
“…disorder or oppositional defiant disorder; however, parents’ ratings of the children’s behaviour on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2005, 1997) (see Table 1) indicated that the majority of children with AS were rated as abnormal on the SDQ total difficulties score.”
BackgroundSpecific reading disability (dyslexia): what have we learned in the past four decades?
Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1046/j.0021-9630.2003.00305.x · Cited by 2,555 · cited 1×
“These measures are sensitive to deficits at the level of segmental phonemic representations, which have been viewed as a proximal cognitive cause dyslexia (Vellutino et al., 2004).”
BackgroundSelf-citationNeuroscience of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: the search for endophenotypes
Castellanos, F. X., & Tannock, R. (2002) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn896 · Cited by 1,827 · cited 4×
“inconsistent with the hypothesis of Castellanos and Tannock (2002) that problems in temporal processing underpin the deficits in phonological awareness associated with dyslexia.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialImpulsivity and Inhibitory Control
Logan, G. D., Schachar, R. J., & Tannock, R. (1997) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00545.x · Cited by 1,471 · cited 2×
“The delay between the presentation of the visual stimulus and the onset of the stop-signal (stop-signal delay (SSD)) was initially set to 250ms and was adjusted up or down in 50ms increments depending on the accuracy of the child’s response (Logan et al., 1997).”
MethodMARTINUSSEN, R., HAYDEN, J., HOGG-JOHNSON, S., & TANNOCK, R. (2005) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000153228.72591.73 · Cited by 1,297
Test of Word Reading Efficiency
Dumont, R., & Willis, J. O. (2008) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470373699.speced2080 · Cited by 1,271
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder : a clinical workbook
Barkley, R. A., & Murphy, K. R. (1991) · Cited by 1,144
The children's test of nonword repetition: A test of phonological working memory
Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C., Baddeley, A., & Emslie, H. C. (1994) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658219408258940 · Cited by 898
The cognitive-energetic model: an empirical approach to attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder
Sergeant, J. (2000) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(99)00060-3 · Cited by 645 · cited 1×
“The response variability associated with AS may reflect a difficulty in sustaining attention or cognitive activation (Sergeant, 2000).”
BackgroundWillcutt, E. G., Pennington, B. F., Olson, R. K., Chhabildas, N., & Hulslander, J. (2005) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2701_3 · Cited by 612 · cited 4×
“As in previous studies in which similar rating scales were used (e.g., Willcutt et al., 2005), ratings of 2 or 3 were deemed clinically significant and thus scored as a positive symptom (scoring was reversed for positively worded items).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBarkley, R. A. (1997) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.65 · Cited by 580 · cited 1×
“…that the proximal cognitive cause of dyslexia is a phonological deficit (Vellutino, Fletcher, Snowling, & Scanlon, 2004) whereas the predominant account of ADHD sees it as arising from an impairment in executive functions that affects both cognitive and motivational systems (Barkley, 1997).”
BackgroundA Comparison of the Neuropsychological Profiles of the DSM-IV Subtypes of ADHD
Chhabildas, N., Pennington, B. F., & Willcutt, E. G. (2001) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1023/a:1012281226028 · Cited by 461
Willcutt, E. G., Pennington, B. F., Boada, R., Ogline, J. S., Tunick, R. A., Chhabildas, N. A., & Olson, R. K. (2001) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.110.1.157 · Cited by 451 · cited 7×
“However, later studies failed to support this hypothesis (e.g., Willcutt et al., 2001; Willcutt, Pennington, Olson, Chhabildas, & Hulslander, 2005), instead reporting that comorbid dyslexia+ADHD is associated with a combination of the cognitive impairments seen in dyslexia andADHD alone (Adams &…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialNeuropsychological profiles of adolescents with ADHD: effects of reading difficulties and gender
Rucklidge, J. J., & Tannock, R. (2002) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00227 · Cited by 426 · cited 4×
“They also failed to provide support for the ‘cognitive subtype’ hypothesis (e.g., de Jong et al., 2006; Rucklidge & Tannock, 2002) because children with dyslexia+AS exhibited neither different, nor more severe, deficits than children with either pure condition.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialContrasting cognitive deficits in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder versus reading disability
Pennington, B. F., Groisser, D., & Welsh, M. C. (1993) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.3.511 · Cited by 416 · cited 1×
“Since children with dyslexia+AS performed poorly on measures of executive function as well as on phonological tasks, our findings refute the ‘phenocopy’ hypothesis (Pennington et al., 1993).”
ResultThe relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children
Ramus, F., Pidgeon, E., & Uta Frith, A. (2003) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00157 · Cited by 305 · cited 2×
“Such a pattern would, in turn, give a possible explanation for how shared genetic risk factors might operate to cause these disorders and the comorbidity between them.”
BackgroundMethodTemporal information processing in ADHD: Findings to date and new methods
Toplak, M. E., Dockstader, C., & Tannock, R. (2006) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2005.09.018 · Cited by 300 · cited 1×
“Duration discrimination deficits have been found to be associated with both dyslexia and AS in this and in previous studies (Nicolson et al., 1995; Toplak et al., 2006).”
ResultLearning to Read: The Role of Short-Term Memory and Phonological Skills
McDougall, S. J. P., Hulme, C., Ellis, A. W., & Monk, A. F. (1994) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1006/jecp.1994.1028 · Cited by 259 · cited 1×
“This task was adapted from that used by Nicolson et al. (1995) and Ramus, Pidgeon, and Frith (2003).”
MethodSelf-citationTime estimation deficits in developmental dyslexia: evidence of cerebellar involvement
Nicolson, R. I., Fawcett, A. J., & Dean, P. (1995) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0007 · Cited by 227 · cited 2×
“Duration discrimination deficits have been found to be associated with both dyslexia and AS in this and in previous studies (Nicolson et al., 1995; Toplak et al., 2006).”
MethodResultDo Temporal Processing Deficits Cause Phonological Processing Problems?
Nittrouer, S. (1999) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/jslhr.4204.925 · Cited by 226 · cited 1×
“They also suggest that temporal processing deficits may underpin the deficits in time perception (Nicolson, Fawcett, & Dean, 1995) and phoneme awareness associated with dyslexia (although this remains controversial (Nittrouer, 1999; Marshall, Snowling, & Bailey, 2001)).”
BackgroundNigg, J. T., Hinshaw, S. P., Carte, E. T., & Treuting, J. J. (1998) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.107.3.468 · Cited by 222
Specific Disorders and Broader Phenotypes: The Case of Dyslexia
Snowling, M. J. (2007) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210701508830 · Cited by 212 · cited 1×
“On the basis of findings from a family risk study of dyslexia, Snowling (2008) proposed that phonological deficits may be better conceptualised as an endophenotype of dyslexia rather than a marker of reading difficulties per se, because some individuals with phonological deficits can compensate for…”
BackgroundSelf-citationStrengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
Goodman, R. (1997) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t00540-000 · Cited by 204 · cited 1×
“…disorder or oppositional defiant disorder; however, parents’ ratings of the children’s behaviour on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2005, 1997) (see Table 1) indicated that the majority of children with AS were rated as abnormal on the SDQ total difficulties score.”
BackgroundPsychological Mechanisms in Hyperactivity: II The Role of Genetic Factors
Kuntsi, J., & Stevenson, J. (2001) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00712 · Cited by 147
Rapid Auditory Processing and Phonological Ability in Normal Readers and Readers With Dyslexia
Marshall, C. M., Snowling, M. J., & Bailey, P. J. (2001) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2001/073 · Cited by 144
Self-citationRaberger, T., & Wimmer, H. (2003) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/s0028-3932(03)00078-2 · Cited by 139 · cited 2×
“…in phonological skills (phonological awareness, phonological memory and decoding) whereas AS was associated with increased response variability, deficits in attention and in visuo-spatial short-term memory (STM) (see also, Raberger & Wimmer, 2003; Rhodes et al., 2005; Willcutt et al., 2001).”
BackgroundRommelse, N. N. J., Altink, M. E., Fliers, E. A., Martin, N. C., Buschgens, C. J. M., Hartman, C. A., Buitelaar, J. K., Faraone, S. V., Sergeant, J. A., & Oosterlaan, J. (2009) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10802-009-9312-6 · Cited by 138 · cited 1×
“These findings are in line with research that suggests high comorbidity between ADHD and disruptive behaviour disorders (e.g., Rommelse et al., 2009).”
ResultSavage, R. S., Cornish, K. M., Manly, T., & Hollis, C. P. (2006) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1348/000712605x81370 · Cited by 131
Neuropsychological functioning in stimulant-naive boys with hyperkinetic disorder
RHODES, S. M., COGHILL, D. R., & MATTHEWS, K. (2005) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291705004599 · Cited by 126 · cited 3×
“Dyslexia was associated with deficits in phonological skills (phonological awareness, phonological memory and decoding) whereas AS was associated with increased response variability, deficits in attention and in visuo-spatial short-term memory (STM) (see also, Raberger & Wimmer, 2003; Rhodes et al., 2005; Willcutt et…”
BackgroundResultSensory processing, reading, IQ, and attention
Hulslander, J., Talcott, J. B., Witton, C., DeFries, J. C., Pennington, B. F., Wadsworth, S. J., Willcutt, E. G., & Olson, R. K. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2004.03.006 · Cited by 115 · cited 2×
“…a screening assessment including the Matrices, Vocabulary, Word Reading and Spelling subtests from the British Abilities Scales-II (BAS II; Elliott et al., 1996) and their parents and teachers were asked to complete a rating scale for AS (e.g., Barkley & Murphy, 1998; Hulslander et al., 2004).”
BackgroundMethodBishop, D. (2006) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210500489372 · Cited by 106 · cited 3×
“As recommended by Halliday and Bishop (2006), a three-interval three-alternative forced choice (oddball) paradigm was used to reduce memory load.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEndophenotypes and child psychiatry
Skuse, D. (2001) · The British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.178.5.395 · Cited by 86 · cited 1×
“There is currently growing interest in the search for the ‘endophenotypes’ underlying developmental disorders (Skuse, 2001).”
BackgroundReading disability and hyperactivity disorder: Evidence for a common genetic etiology
Light, J. G., Pennington, B. F., Gilger, J. W., & DeFries, J. C. (1995) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1080/87565649509540623 · Cited by 77
How Distinctive are ADHD and RD? Results of a Double Dissociation Study
de Jong, C. G. W., Voorde, S. V. D., Roeyers, H., Raymaekers, R., Oosterlaan, J., & Sergeant, J. A. (2009) · Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology · doi:10.1007/s10802-009-9328-y · Cited by 76 · cited 2×
“Such a pattern would, in turn, give a possible explanation for how shared genetic risk factors might operate to cause these disorders and the comorbidity between them.”
BackgroundMethodExecutive function and reading impairments in children reported by their teachers as ‘hyperactive’
Adams, J. W., & Snowling, M. J. (2001) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1348/026151001166083 · Cited by 75 · cited 1×
“…Hulslander, 2005), instead reporting that comorbid dyslexia+ADHD is associated with a combination of the cognitive impairments seen in dyslexia andADHD alone (Adams & Snowling, 2001; Nigg, Hinshaw, Carte, & Treuting, 1998; Raberger & Wimmer, 2003; Rucklidge & Tannock, 2002; Willcutt et al., 2005).”
BackgroundSelf-citationStevenson, J., Langley, K., Pay, H., Payton, A., Worthington, J., Ollier, W., & Thapar, A. (2005) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01533.x · Cited by 70 · cited 1×
“The frequent comorbidity of reading and attention difficulties raises the issue of whether common causal mechanisms, at either the cognitive or biological levels, may be involved (Light, Pennington, Gilger, & DeFries, 1995; Stevenson et al., 2005).”
BackgroundAuditory frequency discrimination in children with dyslexia
Halliday, L. F., & Bishop, D. (2006) · Journal of Research in Reading · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00286.x · Cited by 58 · cited 1×
“…disorder or oppositional defiant disorder; however, parents’ ratings of the children’s behaviour on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2005, 1997) (see Table 1) indicated that the majority of children with AS were rated as abnormal on the SDQ total difficulties score.”
BackgroundTime Perception: Does It Distinguish ADHD and RD Children in a Clinical Sample?
McGee, R., Brodeur, D., Symons, D., Andrade, B., & Fahie, C. (2004) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1023/b:jacp.0000037778.61929.1b · Cited by 47
de Jong, C. G. W., Oosterlaan, J., & Sergeant, J. A. (2006) · International Journal of Disability Development and Education · doi:10.1080/10349120600716158 · Cited by 31 · cited 2×
“They also failed to provide support for the ‘cognitive subtype’ hypothesis (e.g., de Jong et al., 2006; Rucklidge & Tannock, 2002) because children with dyslexia+AS exhibited neither different, nor more severe, deficits than children with either pure condition.”
BackgroundResult
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Elliott C.D., 1996, British Ability Scales II (BAS II)
- Gathercole S.E., 1996, Children’s test of Nonword Repetition (CNRep)
- Manly T., 1999, The Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA‐Ch)
- Pickering S.J., 2001, Working Memory Test Battery for Children (WMTB‐C)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reaction time variability in ADHD: A meta-analytic review of 319 studies
Kofler, M. J., Rapport, M. D., Sarver, D. E., Raiker, J. S., Orban, S. A., Friedman, L. M., & Kolomeyer, E. G. (2013) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2013.06.001 · Cited by 648
Noreika, V., Falter, C. M., & Rubia, K. (2013) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.036 · Cited by 339
Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2011) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02495.x · Cited by 369
“However, Gooch, Snowling, and Hulme (2011) compared children with attention or reading difficulties with a co-morbid group and found that problems of time reproduction were associated exclusively with ADHD, whereas problems of phonological awareness were associated exclusively with dyslexia.”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe Conceptual and Methodological Mayhem of “Screen Time”
K. Kaye, L., Orben, A., A. Ellis, D., C. Hunter, S., & Houghton, S. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17103661 · Cited by 304
“That is, accumulating evidence indicates that timing functions are impaired in a variety of developmental disorders including ADHD [32,33], dyslexia [34], and autism [35,36].”
BackgroundUnderstanding Neurocognitive Developmental Disorders Can Improve Education for All
Butterworth, B. L., & Kovas, Y. V. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1231022 · Cited by 244
Metadata
- Authors
- Gooch, D., Snowling, M., & Hulme, C.
- Affiliations
- University of York (GB)
- Venue
- Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-09-23
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 195-203
- ISSN
- 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7610
- PMC
- PMC3412207
- OpenAlex
- W2114204835
- Cited by
- 157
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 5.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
- Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (082036)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Keywords
- time perception, duration discrimination, time reproduction, phonological skills, executive function, dyslexia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, comorbidities, inattention, children
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Dyslexia, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Phonetics, Reading, Time Perception, Verbal Learning, Comorbidity, Case-Control Studies, Executive Function
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
