Discordance Between Psychometric Testing and Questionnaire-Based Definitions of Executive Function Deficits in Individuals With ADHD
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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.”
From Practitioner Review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? (2013) · cites this paper as Biederman et al. (2008)
Only 14% of participants who had impairment on performance-based measures of executive function reported impairment on the rating scale measure of executive function.
“Only 14% of the participants who had impairment on the performancebased measures of executive function reported impairment on the rating scale measure of executive function.”
From Practitioner Review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? (2013) · cites this paper as Biederman et al. (2008)
Impairment on performance-based measures of executive function does not translate into impairment on ratings of executive function, or vice versa.
“Impairment on performance-based measures of executive function does not translate into impairment on ratings of executive function, or vice versa , as was demonstrated by Biederman et al. (2008).”
From Practitioner Review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? (2013) · cites this paper as Biederman et al. (2008)
Biederman and colleagues found only a modest overlap between psychometric and self-reported measures of executive function impairment among ADHD patients.
“Biederman and colleagues [27] found only a modest overlap between psychometric and self-reported measures of executive function impairment among ADHD patients.”
From Atomoxetine Effects on Executive Function as Measured by the BRIEF-A in Young Adults with ADHD: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
Neuropsychological testing was largely found to identify patients with lower IQ and achievement testing, while behavioral questionnaire assessment chiefly identified patients with higher levels of ADHD symptoms, psychiatric comorbidity, and interpersonal deficits.
“Neuropsychological testing was largely found to identify patients with lower IQ and achievement testing, while behavioral questionnaire assessment chiefly identified patients with higher levels of ADHD symptoms, psychiatric comorbidity, and interpersonal deficits.”
From Atomoxetine Effects on Executive Function as Measured by the BRIEF-A in Young Adults with ADHD: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
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
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- 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