Cited by 123Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Discordance Between Psychometric Testing and Questionnaire-Based Definitions of Executive Function Deficits in Individuals With ADHD

Biederman, Joseph, Petty, Carter R., Fried, Ronna, Black, Sarah, Faneuil, Alicia, Doyle, Alysa E., Seidman, Larry J., Faraone, Stephen V.·2008·Journal of Attention Disorders

Abstract

Objective One suspected source of negative outcomes associated with ADHD has been deficits in executive functions. Although both psychometrically defined and self-reported executive function deficits (EFDs) have been shown to be associated with poor academic and occupational outcomes, whether these two approaches define the same individuals remains unknown. Method Participants were 194 adults with ADHD from a case-control study of ADHD. Empirically based cutoffs were ascertained for an EFD diagnosis on both psychometric tests and scores on the Current Behavior Scale. Results Results showed a modest overlap between the psychometric and self-reported definitions of EFDs. Whereas neuropsychological testing largely identified individuals with lower IQ and achievement testing, the behavioral questionnaire largely identified individuals with higher levels of ADHD symptoms, psychiatric comorbidity, and interpersonal deficits. Conclusion Results indicate that behavioral questionnaires cannot be used interchangeably with neuropsychological testing for the assessment of EFDs in adults with ADHD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1087054707305111

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?

  • The construct validity of executive function rating scales has been questioned because they consistently correlate non-significantly or weakly with performance-based tests measuring the same construct.

    “the construct validity of executive function rating scales has been questioned because they consistently correlate non-significantly (Biederman et al., 2008; Conklin et al., 2008; Mahone et al., 2002) or weakly (Gross et al. 2015; Miranda et al., 2015; Nordvall et al., 2017) with performance-based tests measuring the same construct.”

    From Executive functioning rating scales: Ecologically valid or construct invalid? (2020) · cites this paper as Biederman et al., 2008

  • Replicated evidence shows that executive function rating scales and performance-based tests are weakly or non-significantly associated with each other.

    “replicated evidence indicates weak/non-significant cross-method associations that suggest divergent rather than convergent validity.”

    From Executive functioning rating scales: Ecologically valid or construct invalid? (2020) · cites this paper as Biederman et al., 2008

  • The modest EF test/rating association is consistent with prior literature showing modest to non-significant measure-level relations in child, adolescent, and adult populations.

    “This finding was highly consistent with prior literature showing modest to non-significant measure-level relations between these two putative methods for assessing the same construct in child, adolescent, and adult populations (Biederman et al., 2008; Conklin et al., 2008; Mahone et al., 2002)”

    From Executive functioning rating scales: Ecologically valid or construct invalid? (2020) · cites this paper as Biederman et al., 2008

  • The concept of "executive dysfunction" is heterogeneous and different behavioral and neurocognitive measures are often only weakly correlated with each other.

    “It is important to note in this regard that the concept of “executive dysfunction” is heterogeneous and that different behavioral and neurocognitive measures are often only weakly correlated with each other (Biederman et al., 2008).”

    From The structure of adult ADHD. (2017) · cites this paper as Biederman et al., 2008

  • In adults with ADHD, there was little overlap in the impairment identified by performance-based and rating measures of executive function.

    “There was little overlap in the impairment identified by these two domains of measures.”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 23 · Cited by 123

Authors
Biederman, J., Petty, C. R., Fried, R., Black, S., Faneuil, A., Doyle, A. E., Seidman, L. J., & Faraone, S. V.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • SUNY Upstate Medical University (US)
Venue
Journal of Attention Disorders
Published
2008-01-11
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
92-102
ISSN
  • 1087-0547 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1246
OpenAlex
W2025633094
Cited by
123
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Attention Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH057934, R01MH-57934)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, executive dysfunction, psychometric assessment, self-report questionnaire, adult ADHD, neuropsychological assessment, psychiatric comorbidity, interpersonal problems, diagnostic thresholds
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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