Cited by 39Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Underlying processes in the poor response inhibition of children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Open access
Gomez, Rapson·2003·Journal of Attention Disorders

Abstract

This study evaluated the effects of reward, punishment, and reward + punishment on the impulsive responses of ADHD children. The impulsive responses of ADHD and normal control boys (30 per group) were compared during performance of a go/no-go task, administered under reward-only, punishment-only, and reward + punishment conditions. When differences in aggression, anxiety, and IQ between these groups were controlled for, results indicated that the impulsivity levels of the ADHD group were higher than the control group in all three reinforcement conditions. Also, the ADHD group was more impulsive in the reward + punishment condition, compared to the reward-only and punishment-only conditions, and there was no difference between the reward-only and punishment-only conditions. The control groups showed no difference across the three reinforcement conditions. These findings raise the possibility that the poor response inhibition of ADHD children may be related to both a generalized inhibitory deficit and a response modulation deficit.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/108705470300600303

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • BART simultaneously presents rewards and negative punishment, which is necessary to optimally evoke impulsive responding.

    “BART also simultaneously presents rewards (points) and negative punishment (points revoked for an exploded balloon), which is necessary to optimally evoke impulsive responding (Gomez 2003).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gomez, R.
Affiliations
University of Ballarat in Australia,
Corresponding author
Gomez, Rapson
Venue
Journal of Attention Disorders
Published
2003-04
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
111-122
ISSN
  • 1087-0547 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1246
OpenAlex
W1970304726
Cited by
39
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Attention Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • FedUni ResearchOnline (Federation University Australia) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
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, response inhibition, impulsivity, reward, punishment, go/no-go task, reinforcement conditions, inhibitory deficits, children
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Aggression, Anxiety, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Humans, Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders, Inhibition, Psychological, Intelligence, Male, Punishment, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward, 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