Cited by 84Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Decision making in adults with ADHD

Mäntylä, Timo, Still, Johanna, Gullberg, Stina, Del Missier, Fabio·2012·Journal of Attention Disorders

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study examined decision-making competence in ADHD by using multiple decision tasks with varying demands on analytic versus affective processes. METHODS: Adults with ADHD and healthy controls completed two tasks of analytic decision making, as measured by the Adult Decision-Making Competence (A-DMC) battery, and two affective decision tasks (the Balloon Analog Risk Task and the lowa Gambling Task). RESULTS: Although a majority of the ADHD participants were tested under medication, they showed impairments in both types of task. However, logistic regression analysis showed that the applying-decision-rules task of the A-DMC battery was the only significant predictor of ADHD status. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested that ADHD is associated with impaired decision making in tasks involving a significant degree of cognitive control. Although both deliberative and affective neurocognitive systems probably contributed to ADHD-related problems in decision making, the findings underlined the involvement of prefrontally mediated executive functions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1087054709360494

Cites

74 of 74 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?

  • Two studies investigated the performance of adults with ADHD on the BART and neither revealed significant differences in risky performance between adults with ADHD and NCs.

    “Two studies investigated the performance of adults with ADHD on the BART and neither study revealed significant differences in risky performance between adults with ADHD and NCs [64], [65].”
  • In Mäntylä et al., adults with ADHD pumped the balloons more up than NCs during the first of 10 trials, but there were no group differences in the remaining 50 trials, resulting in no overall group difference on the BART.

    “Specifically, while in the study of Mäntyla et al. [64] the adults with ADHD pumped the balloons more up than NCs during the first of 10 trials, there were no group differences in the remaining 50 trials, resulting in no overall group difference on this task.”
  • Mäntylä et al. found that adults with ADHD earned less money on a standard IGT than NCs (Cohen's d = 0.56), but this group effect appears to have been mediated by the educational level of the participants.

    “The study of Mäntylä et al. [64] initially appears different from those described above in that they found that adults with ADHD earned less money on a standard IGT than NCs (Cohen’s d = 0.56). This group effect, however, appears to have been mediated by the educational level of the participants.”
  • Two other studies reported no greater levels of risky performance in adults with ADHD on the standard IGT compared to NCs, and one other study only revealed aberrant performance on the standard IGT in a subgroup of adults with ADHD with both hard drug dependence and working memory problems.

    “Much like Agay et al. [59], two other studies have also reported no greater levels of risky performance in adults with ADHD on the standard IGT when compared to NCs [61], [64], and one other study only revealed aberrant performance on the standard IGT in a subgroup of adults with ADHD with both hard drug dependence and working memory problems [60].”
  • Null findings were reported in 1/15 (7%) of studies with null findings in which participants were on MPH treatment during assessment.

    “and MPH treatment during assessment: 1/15 = 7% of studies with null findings [64]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mäntylä, T., Still, J., Gullberg, S., & Del Missier, F.
Affiliations
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • University of Trieste
Venue
Journal of Attention Disorders
Published
2010-04-21
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
164-173
ISSN
  • 1087-0547 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1246
OpenAlex
W2109931295
Cited by
84
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Attention Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, decision-making, analytic decision making, emotional decision-making, cognitive control, executive function, prefrontal cortex, Balloon Analogue Risk Task, Iowa Gambling Task, ADHD medication
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Decision Making, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, 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.

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